Confess your sin, UPCI!

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by shag

Ive read thru this off and on a little, and Im not really trying to interupt the discussion at hand, escept briefly, to see what ya guys think of this.....dont throw stones at me now...

I know pentecostals are quick to defend against this, but there are some, as you all know, that feel that just the apostles were the tongue talkers in Acs 2, and 1 proof of that is in the following verse, and I consider this particular verse to be a worthy consideration. Maybe it has been brot up B4 in another thread, I dunno.Here it is:



Acts 1:7 7And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans?



So which is more likely, they figured the 12 were probably all Galileans, or they thot the 120 were all Galileans?


SOME interesting thots..Jesus told the apostles to wait for the Holy Spirit (Acts 1:2-5) Then two angels spoke to the apostles and called them “men of Galilee”. (Acts 1:11)


Joseph of Arimathea and Mary, Martha, and Lazarus of Bethany were not Galileans, and who knows how many of the 120....

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?

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Hoovie

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?

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."

[shag]

Originally Posted by Hoovie

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?

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..

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by shag

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 pretty hard evidence for it just being the 12 in Acts 2(thot to be ALL Galileans). That does not mean that tongues and etc could not otherwise also follow the believer...to jive with other scriptures like I posted..

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.

[Sam]

Originally Posted by Brother David

Sam, filling the thread with cut-and-paste anecdotes is NOT the same as providing evidence. If "Pressing-On" is to have her case made, then we surely MUST have evidence of Acts 2:4-8, occurring in every single Pentecostal service. If she were correct, there would be reams of video and authenticated instances of linguists entering Pentecostal services and being saved by the score!

But we have nothing other than cut-and-paste anecdotes; second and third hand testimonies at best... and YOU don't even subscribe to the Three Stepper creed.

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.

[Sam]

Originally Posted by Hoovie

...
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.
...

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.

[Praxeas]

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

[Sam]

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.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Sam

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.

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?

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

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

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!