Peter explains who these people were in verse 14: ‘Peter standing up with the eleven,’ so the context is the 12 apostles!
Peter didn't explain anything. It wasn't Peter who wrote the book of Acts.
And at least 16 different dialects were mentioned as having been spoken on the day of Pentecost. Unless the 12 disciples were switching off on which particular languages they were speaking, there would have had to have been more than 12 speaking those languages.
Quote:
Thirdly, those who spoke in tongues at Acts 2:4 were Galileans, whilst not all of the company of the 120, which numbered both men and women would have been Galilean.
Says who? Did Galilee not have 120 people in it or something, or are you just assuming that you couldn't get 120 people from the same town in one place at one time?
Peter didn't explain anything. It wasn't Peter who wrote the book of Acts.
And at least 16 different dialects were mentioned as having been spoken on the day of Pentecost. Unless the 12 disciples were switching off on which particular languages they were speaking, there would have had to have been more than 12 speaking those languages.
Says who? Did Galilee not have 120 people in it or something, or are you just assuming that you couldn't get 120 people from the same town in one place at one time?
That's a point I've never heard mentioned before.
__________________ Smiles & Blessings.... ~Felicity Welsh~ (surname courtesy of Jim Yohe)
We've had everything discussed on these forums from soup to nuts including whether or not there's a God. When someone like Iron Bladder comes along, it just gives people opportunity to once again state TRUTH.
People argue and fuss about all kinds of stupid stuff day after day on these forums. Why not those who are capable unsheathe their swords and cleanly and capably cut off the giant's head so to speak.
Do we ban people just because they present an argument we disagree with?
There are BETTER reasons to ban people imo.
There is a difference in discussion and promotion of doctrine.
For instance, we can discuss homosexuality in the church, but it's not appropriate for someone to come here and promote their homosexual Apostolic church and call it 'discussion'.
__________________
I've gone and done it now! I'm on Facebook!!!
“Others mocking said, These men are full of new wine. But Peter, standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and said unto them, Ye men of Judaea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem, be this known unto you, and hearken to my words: For these are not drunken, as ye suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day.” (Acts 2:13-15, KJV).
At this passage the same company of men are referred to separately, in three ways, within each of these three verses. At verse 13, they are referred to as ‘these men,’ then at verse 14, the same group of men are referred to as ‘Peter … with the eleven,’ and finally at verse 15, ‘these are not drunken,’ again refers to this same group of men. Now, whilst this might seem blindingly obvious to most people, I’ll point this out at the outset because some have attempted to argue that verse 14 bears absolutely no relationship whatsoever to verses 13 and 15, which they’ll claim refers to the 120 disciples, whilst the context at verse 14 shifts to the 12 apostles. So they’ll conclude that because every Christian, all 120 souls spoke in tongues on the day of Pentecost, therefore all Christians should also speak in tongues today.
Firstly, the total number of Christians before Pentecost numbered a minimum of 500 persons, please see 1st Corinthians 15:6, which expressly states that some 500 faithful persons saw the risen Christ on a mountainside. So if a total of only 120 spoke in tongues on the day of Pentecost, as many Pentecostals will claim, then their theology must imply two classes of Christians, right from the day of Pentecost.
Secondly, Acts 1:15 which mentions the 120 bears no relationship to Acts 2:13-15 being separated by both a period of several days as well as by linguistic breaks within the text itself. For instance, the text changes its context from the 120 and shifts to the 11 apostles at Acts 1:21-23, where the triple use of the pronoun ‘us,’ at verses 21-22 and ‘they proposed’ at verse 23, refers only to the 11 apostles who then drew lots to chose Matthias as Judas’ replacement. The 120 disciples didn’t draw lots, the 11 apostles did. So my point is that because only the 11 apostles drew lots, therefore the context from this passage until Acts 2:13-15 remains that of the 12 apostles, which is exactly what we read at Acts 1:26: ‘Matthias, and he was numbered with the 11 apostles.’ So the word ‘they’ at Acts 2:1, directly refers back to the previous verse (Acts 1:26), in which the context are 12 apostles and not the 120 of Acts 1:15.
Thirdly, those who spoke in tongues at Acts 2:4 were Galileans, whilst not all of the company of the 120, which numbered both men and women would have been Galilean. This is confirmed at Acts 2:7: ‘are not these who speak Galileans.’ Three times at Acts 2:14, 22 and 29 Peter addresses the crowd referring to them as men. The word which he uses for men (anar), numbered 435 in Strong’s concordance which only ever refers to the male sex, being used 215 times in the Greek New Testament, of which the King James version translates this word as man 156 times, husband 50 times and sir 6 times. The events of the day of Pentecost took place at the Jerusalem temple, where people were congregated, to worship God, where they were separated according to gender into different courtyards. This is yet another reason why ‘anar’ couldn’t have been used to refer to both men and also to women at Acts 2. So the use of ‘anar’ at Acts 2:5 implies a situation of males speaking in languages to other men.
Fourthly, The tongues of fire which rested upon the twelve apostles’ heads (Acts 2:3) represented the 12 Levitical offerings of seven lambs, a bull, two rams, in the burnt offering, as well as the two lambs of the peace offering which were sacrificed at the feast of weeks (Pentecost), exactly fifty days after the feast of Passover (Leviticus 23:16). This is why we read that these twelve named animals (or offerings) were to be burnt with fire: ‘even an offering made by fire, of sweet savour unto the LORD’ (Leviticus 23:18-19). So the tongues of fire which rested upon each of the twelve apostle’s heads at Acts 2:3, had a definite purpose, in that they echoed this Old Testament oblation by fire of twelve offerings, representing the twelve tribes of Israel to God, at the feast of weeks (Pentecost) which was fifty days after the Passover.
Fifthly, the references to ‘new wine’ at verse 13 and ‘not drunk’ at verse 15, refers to the same company of people. Peter explains who these people were in verse 14: ‘Peter standing up with the eleven,’ so the context is the 12 apostles! This context doesn’t change from the 120 in verse 13, back to the 12 at verse 14 and then back to the 120 again at verse 15! As those accused of drunkenness by the scoffers, were those same 12 men of Acts 2:13 who’d stood up to directly face their accusers. However, if 120 men and women (and not 12 men) had spoken in tongues, then Acts 2:14 would have read: ‘But Peter standing up with the hundred and nineteen.’
Sixthly, Acts 2:43 referring to the tongues as signs and wonders limits the use of this gift on that day specifically to just the 12 apostles: ‘many wonders and signs were done by the apostles.’ So this word Apostles implies 12 men and not 120 disciples.
Finally in summary, please take careful note that I’m most certainly NOT claiming that only 12 men ever spoke in tongues. That would be a ludicrous claim, for after the day of Pentecost many other people also spoke in tongues (languages) other than the twelve apostles. However, if I can prove that just 12 men spoke on the day of Pentecost, then I've consequently proven that the gift of tongues wasn't ever given to the entire Church and so it can’t be claimed to be a gift for the entire Church today. Tongues were instead originally given specifically to the 12 apostles, but after Pentecost, they could and they certainly did pass it, as well as many other miraculous gifts, onto other Christians, by the laying on of their (the apostles) hands, to signify their unique apostolic authority within the Church (Acts 8:17, 19:6). On other occasions, God used tongues to signify to the apostles that certain people who had just come to faith were genuinely saved. People such as the first gentile converts who evidenced tongues, but without any hands ever being laid upon them (Acts 10:46).
Now if I'm wrong, and tongues were indeed given to the entire Christian Church at Acts 2 on the day of Pentecost, then Acts 2:43 would read: 'And many wonders and signs were done by the 3,500.' For if every Christian should have the gift, then the 500 converts before this day (1st Corinthians 15:6), together with the 3,000 converts (Acts 2:41), would have together both spoken in tongues and so Acts 2:43 confirming this would state that either ‘all Christians’ or ‘3,500 spoke in tongues.’ However by limiting the gift of tongues on that day to just 12 men: 'many wonders and signs were done by the APOSTLES,' Luke is stating that only 12 out of the 3,500 spoke in tongues on that particular day. So it was given to them alone, as God used this gift at Pentecost to confirm direct revelation, via the apostolic office, to unbelieving Jews.
I have a feeling PaPaDon could dialogue along these lines!
Firstly, I only ever post my own posts and I never copy and paste other people's work. Secondly, I make frequent changes as I learn more, for instance the Psalm 2:7 post has just been revised today after a persons comments to me in this chat room. Thirdly, you do the same yourself, although i admit that about 2/3 of my posts are actually repostings. Fourthly, why don't you attempt to refute my arguments, why not prove my premis wrong rather than resort to attacks upon me personally. Fifthly, this post wasn't a copy and paste!!!
Firstly, I never said you copied someone elses.
Secondly I said you save your posts that you posted on another board and then you copy and paste YOUR OWN LONG LONG LONG LONG post on many other boards. So while you demand someone that has never saw your post before to reply to your long long long posts, all YOU had to do was copy and paste it from forum to forum.
It was 120 that spoke in tongues and I had this saved too!
120 people initially received the Spirit and spoke in tongues. This number included women
1)Evidence for the 120
The bible tells us 120 continued TOGETHER in prayer and supplication in the upper room Act 1:13 And when they were come in, they went up into an upper room, where abode both Peter, and James, and John, and Andrew, Philip, and Thomas, Bartholomew, and Matthew, James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon Zelotes, and Judas the brother of James.
Act 1:14 These all continued with one accord in prayer and supplication, with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brethren. Act 1:15 And in those days Peter stood up in the midst of the disciples, and said, (the number of names together were about an hundred and twenty,)
POINT: Notice the number, about 120 could be more, could be less, but close enough to that number. POINT: ?and said? This shows that the following words by Peter were said WHILE standing up in the midst of 120 or so disciples, not 11 Apostles. POINT: Notice they CONTINUED in ONE ACCORD in prayer
Read the continuing verses and there is absolutly NO indication of a dispersal. There is no switch in subject, which are the 120 Disciples continuing together.
2)Acts 1:16-22 Shows what Peter said while standing in the midst of 120 disciples. His speech was about the 11
Apostles and the need to replace one, this is proven by the triple use of the pronoun ?us?. So the audience was the 120 (included the 11), the subject was the 11 and the need to replace Judas.
Acts 1:23 And they appointed two, Joseph called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias.
POINT: this shows two additional MEN, who were NOT Apostles that must have been in that group of 120 in order to be CHOSEN to replace Judas. This is additional evidence that there were more than the 11 and that the Apostles were NOT the only ones that were there but were the subject being discussed.
POINT: Since the subject of discussion was the 11 there is no way of knowing whether it was only the 11 who chose these men or the collective who chose these men.
3) Acts 1:26 And they gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles.
POINT: The context shows Peter was speaking to a collective group of disciples numbering at least 120, including women. The context shows the subject of the speech was the 11 Apostles and who should replace Judas. The context shows finally how they chose to replace him. Therefore verse 26 shows us NOT who was present only, but the result of Peter's speech and their actions.
POINT: Only a careless reading of this verse would lead one to conclude this was the number of all present. Notice it does not say ?the number of men present was 11? but rather the author is telling us who the new Apostle was and that he was added to the remaining number of Apostles. The grammar here in no way tells us the number of who was present only but the result of the vote to replace Judas!
4) Act 2:1 And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place.
POINT: Notice the word THEY. If you read back through Acts chapter 1 you will see THEY can only refer to the collection of Disciples numbering 120. POINT: Notice next the same context as in chapter 1, they were in ONE ACCORD. Those gathered with Peter and the Apostles were also in ONE ACCORD. POINT: There is no indication the 11 separated from the rest of the collective. There is no grammatical break indicating anything changed. Men later added the chapters and verses, so a new chapter does not mean anything changed. POINT: The chronologically, from the meeting with Peter and the 120 the next thing to happen is the outpouring of the Spirit. There is NO OTHER event stated in between so grammatically ?they? MUST refer to the antecedent group present in one accord. POINT: There is NO given number of days between the meeting of 120 to decide on a new Apostle and the events of Pentecost. Nor would it matter. There is no stated rule that says the more days that there are the more disciples would not be present later on. That is fanciful thinking on someone?s part. POINT: Luke tells the story where Jesus told the 11 and an unspecified number of disciples to go to Jerusalem and wait for the Holy Spirit.
Luke continues Acts from what he wrote in Luke
Luk 24:33 And they rose up the same hour, and returned to Jerusalem, and found the eleven gathered together, and them that were with them,
POINT: Acts is a continuation of Luke, the accounts are parallel. Notice the 11 AND them WITH them?? Notice also they were ALL already in Jerusalem together? The number of disciples in Acts tells us the number in Luke
Luke 24:36-51 shows Jesus appearing, teaching the 11 plus the disciples with them about himself, instructed them to go to Jerusalem and preach repentance and remission of sins and promised them He would send the Holy Spirit ON THEM (not just some of them)
Luk 24:47 and repentance for the forgiveness of sins would be proclaimed in his name to all nations, beginning from Jerusalem. Luk 24:48 You are witnesses of these things. Luk 24:49 And look, I am sending you what my Father promised. But stay in the city until you have been clothed with power from on high."
THEN we have this startling account by Luke concerning those disciples, (which were the 11 plus those with them) who had been led out to Bethany by Jesus and returned to Jerusalem
Luk 24:52 And they worshipped him, and returned to Jerusalem with great joy: Luk 24:53And were continually in the temple, praising and blessing God. Amen.
POINT: They refers back to the 11 plus those WITH them. They were continually together praising and blessing God. This is paralleled in Acts chapter 1...compare Lukes account in the gospel with Lukes account in Acts 1
Act 1:4 While he was with them, he declared, "Do not leave Jerusalem, but wait there for what my Father promised, which you heard about from me.
This was instructed, according to Luke to the 11 AND those with the 11. Luke tells us the NUMBER that were WITH the 11 in Acts 1
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.
POINT: The 120 includes the 11 Apostles and THEY CONTINUED TOGETHER...sounds like they were obeying what Jesus told them to do...return to Jerusalem and WAIT for the Promise. They were in ONE MIND...sounds like Acts 2 doesn't it?
5) Act 2:4 And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.
POINT: Notice THEY (refers back to the 120) were ALL filled with the Holy Spirit and THEY ALL began to speak with other tongues POINT: The 11 PLUS those with the 11 were TOLD to go back to Jerusalem and WAIT for this outpouring! Luke confirms this in Acts 1 where we see the 120 CONTINUING together in obedience to Christ in One mind. We see then again in Acts one THEY were together in ONE MIND and THEY were filled. That is clear and unambiguous.
6) In Acts 1 we see Peter stanging in the MIDST of the 120
Act 1:15 In those days Peter stood up among the believers(a gathering of about one hundred and twenty people) and said,
POINT: Merely being the only one to stand up does not mean the rest of the 120 disappeared as some would suggest. Such a silly notion that when the bible says 'Peter standing with the 11" somehow means everyone else disappeared! All it means is the rest of the 120 did NOT stand up
Act 1:16 "Brothers, the scripture had to be fulfilled that the Holy Spirit foretold through David concerning Judas — who became the guide for those who arrested Jesus — Act 1:17 for he was counted as one of us and received a share in this ministry."
POINT: REMEMBER..Peter is standing in the MIDST of the 120 when he begins to talk about how they need to elect one of the disciples to fill Judas vacant spot. Whether or not the 120 all participate is irrelevant, but the fact that Peter was speaking TO the 120 IS relevant! They were there through the whole process. Therefore that Peter and the 11 are mentioned directly in no way implies the rest of the 120 left
So are we allowing anti-apostolic rhetoric to be promoted here now?
I think that I'm after intelligent criticism of my thoughts and insights. If you can prove me wrong, then hey, I'll admit to error and change. I've admitted today that my posting on malachi 3:6 in another thread was wrong, and I've changed this post, though for some strange reason, I can't find this revised post on my memory stick, so I'll have to check my PC at home for it.
Heavenly One, why don't you show me form the Bible where my comments in post one that only 12 people spok ein tongues is wrong - if of course you can.
Linear Mode
