Only 12 spoke in tongues at Pentecost

Originally Posted by Praxeas

It looks like all 120 did, however even if they did not the text grammatically shows there were 120 present for this speech and vote

In that case the double use of the pronoun ‘us’ refers to both men and also to WOMEN at Acts 1:22 according to you; i.e. ‘He (Judas) was taken up from US (the 120 men and women), one of these must become a witness with us (The 120 men and women) of his resurrection.’ So in doing this you’ve just invalidated the office of the apostle.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Iron_Bladder

In that case the double use of the pronoun ‘us’ refers to both men and also to WOMEN at Acts 1:22 according to you; i.e. ‘He (Judas) was taken up from US (the 120 men and women), one of these must become a witness with us (The 120 men and women) of his resurrection.’ So in doing this you’ve just invalidated the office of the apostle.

When interpreting scriptures IB you must remember that you need to consider proper use of grammar, something you have trouble with AND you must consider the context. You have some mysterious rule about double use of a pronoun as if a double use means something as opposed to a single use or a triple use. Did you invent that rule?

Now answer this honestly, what was the number present when Peter stood up and began to speak?

Act 1:15 And in those days Peter stood up in the midst of the disciples and said, (the number of names together was about a hundred and twenty,)
Act 1:16 Men, brothers, this Scripture must have been fulfilled, which the Holy Spirit by the mouth of David spoke before concerning Judas, who became guide to those who seized Jesus.

Since Peter here is speaking of a former Apostle we can use our brains to understand Peter means "us Apostles"

Though it could very well include ALL the disciples because this verse you refer to does not say "Apostle" and we know it was not just the 12 that ministered. There were the 70

Even so, answer this next verse (I know you won't as you have avoided my points up till now)

Act 1:21 Thus one of the men who have accompanied us during all the time the Lord Jesus associated with us,
Act 1:22 beginning from his baptism by John until the day he was taken up from us — one of these must become a witness of his resurrection together with us."

Now..IB, why does Peter say one of THESE men and not "one of them" or "one of those" if those other men were NOT present as you have argued?

Another question I know you won't answer

Act 1:13 When they had entered Jerusalem, they went to the upstairs room where they were staying. Peter and John, and James, and Andrew, Philip and Thomas, Bartholomew and Matthew, James son of Alphaeus and Simon the Zealot, and Judas son of James were there.
Act 1:14 All these continued together in prayer with one mind, together with the women, along with Mary the mother of Jesus, and his brothers.

Why does it say these CONTINUED together in prayer with one mind? when you have them NOT continuing together???

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Iron_Bladder

This is certainly a valid criticism of my post and an interesting point made by Praxeas. However, the apostles certainly had the ability to transfer gifts by the laying on of their hands, just read two verses before at Acts 6:4 and you’ll see that Stephen was appointed (deacon) by the laying on of the apostles hands. Paul himself also states that he wished ‘to impart some spiritual gift’ by the laying on of his (an apostle’s) hands (Romans 1:11): also ‘stir up the gift of God which is in you by the laying on of my hands.’ (1st Timothy 1:6). So Stephen’s gift was given to him to authenticate the apostolic office, today people can’t be given a similar gift by the laying on of the apostle’s hands, and the last apostle died in the first century and nobody else can impart spiritual gifts by the laying on of hands. Nonetheless, I will amend my original post on signs and wonders, so thank you for the astute comment. However, I’d still maintain that ‘signs and wonders’ don’t equate to charismata, they are different and distinct gifts the former only testifies to the apostolic office.

You said ONLY the Apostles did signs wonders and miracles. You are clearly wrong. Nor does any verse say they can ONLY recieve gifts from the laying on of hands from an Apostle

[Praxeas]

“But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel; And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams: And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy:” Acts 2:16-18, KJV).

The context here is not upon ‘tongues’ but on prophecy, which is a completely different spiritual gift according to 1st Corinthians 14:4, which distinguishes between these two gifts.

I didn't say this was about tongues. I said prophecy. You raised the issue of only the 12 doing signs wonders and miracles and Joel disagrees with you. Once again you totally avoided my point and confused it

[Falla39]

But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel; And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams: And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy:” Acts 2:16-18, KJV)

QUOTE=Praxeas;157410]I didn't say this was about tongues. I said prophecy. You raised the issue of only the 12 doing signs wonders and miracles and Joel disagrees with you. Once again you totally avoided my point and confused it[/QUOTE]

I haven't been on this thread for a good while but did we ever decide

precisely which ones of the apostles were the handmaidens!!!

Blessings,

Falla39

Originally Posted by Praxeas

When interpreting scriptures IB you must remember that you need to consider proper use of grammar, something you have trouble with AND you must consider the context. You have some mysterious rule about double use of a pronoun as if a double use means something as opposed to a single use or a triple use. Did you invent that rule?

Now answer this honestly, what was the number present when Peter stood up and began to speak?

Act 1:15 And in those days Peter stood up in the midst of the disciples and said, (the number of names together was about a hundred and twenty,)
Act 1:16 Men, brothers, this Scripture must have been fulfilled, which the Holy Spirit by the mouth of David spoke before concerning Judas, who became guide to those who seized Jesus.

Since Peter here is speaking of a former Apostle we can use our brains to understand Peter means "us Apostles"

Though it could very well include ALL the disciples because this verse you refer to does not say "Apostle" and we know it was not just the 12 that ministered. There were the 70

Even so, answer this next verse (I know you won't as you have avoided my points up till now)

Act 1:21 Thus one of the men who have accompanied us during all the time the Lord Jesus associated with us,
Act 1:22 beginning from his baptism by John until the day he was taken up from us — one of these must become a witness of his resurrection together with us."

Now..IB, why does Peter say one of THESE men and not "one of them" or "one of those" if those other men were NOT present as you have argued?

Another question I know you won't answer

Act 1:13 When they had entered Jerusalem, they went to the upstairs room where they were staying. Peter and John, and James, and Andrew, Philip and Thomas, Bartholomew and Matthew, James son of Alphaeus and Simon the Zealot, and Judas son of James were there.
Act 1:14 All these continued together in prayer with one mind, together with the women, along with Mary the mother of Jesus, and his brothers.

Why does it say these CONTINUED together in prayer with one mind? when you have them NOT continuing together???

The phrase 'together with us' limits the context to the 11 apostles who were directly appointed by Christ himself and witnesses of his resurrection.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Iron_Bladder

The phrase 'together with us' limits the context to the 11 apostles who were directly appointed by Christ himself and witnesses of his resurrection.

IB if you are going to insist everyone else respond to your points and answer your questions then you need to reciprocate and stop dismissing entire posts full of points this way.

Your posts are held in moderation que. That means they don't get posted until an admin approves them. If you just dismiss all my questions and points like this then I will stop approving your posts

[Trouvere]

Heres what I really want to know Robert....why the name Iron_Bladder?

[KwaiQ]

Mark 16:17 1Cor14:22 and Acts 19:6 coupled with Joel 2. All attest to the initial sign of speaking in tongues as evidence of the Holy Ghost. No problem here as far as I can see.

Originally Posted by Praxeas

When interpreting scriptures IB you must remember that you need to consider proper use of grammar, something you have trouble with AND you must consider the context.

Two groups of people are mentioned here at Acts 1:15-26; firstly a group of 120 disciples at verse 15 which comprised both men and women and secondly a smaller group of 11 men, the apostles (Acts 1:20-26) which then returned to its original number of 12 men (Acts 1:26). Therefore two separate groups are being spoken of at Acts 1, do you agree with this Praxeas, and one man; Matthias leaves the former group of 120 to join the select group of 12 apostles. This context is easy to prove, for at Acts 1:20 the context shifts from the 120 to those men holding a position of leadership within the Church, this implies the apostles when the text states; ‘and his bishoprick let another take.’ Then at Acts 1:22 the reference to; ‘these which have companied with us’ again refers to the apostles, for the pronoun ‘us’ implies the 12 apostles who accompanied Christ throughout his ministry from the commencement of his ministry at time of his baptism by John and were thus also witnesses of Christ’s death and resurrection (Acts 1:23). So the passage opens at Acts 1:15 with the context being 120 men and women, but then changes to male leadership within the Church ‘his bishoprick’ (Acts 1:20), those who choose a replacement for Judas are only the 11 apostles, thus the context moves from men and women at (Acts 1:15) to the 12 male apostles (Acts 1:26).