Only 12 spoke in tongues at Pentecost

Originally Posted by HeavenlyOne

Not that you are accusing me, but I want to publicly state that I haven't reported any of his posts, but merely asked a question that I thought should have been asked by now.

Well I do admit to being a Trinitarian and i do admit as a former Oneness Pentecostal myself, to strongly opposing many points of Oneness doctrine, that's why I'm here to discuss Oneness and Trinitarian theology. I don't want to get drawn into Praxeas' personal comments and insults.

Originally Posted by Felicity

This is just my opinion......

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.

Thank you felicity, I'm grateful for your kind comments. I therefore as a Trinitarian rest my case that on the day of pentecost only 12 men spoke in tongues. After that day many others also did, men and women, but that isn't relevant to my premise outlined in post one.

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

I read that as those representing the group that had congregated.

I'm sorry passing on, would you please explain yoru comment as I don't understand it. The verse which you referred to I understand as referring to the 12 apostles.

thanks

robert

Originally Posted by bishopnl

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?

Hello Bishopnl, I think that we've crossed lines, possibly you havn't understood my points in post one. So to reply to your first comment, they wen't speaking 16 dialects but approximately 12 languages and 4 dialects of sopme of those languages.

Secondly, the standard pentecostal position on the 120 is that they comprised the entire Christian Church at the time of Acts 1, this then expanded to 3,120 at Acts 2. My point in rebuttal is that as not every Christian was a Galilean, therefore the number 120 could not have comprised the entire Christian Church, and I'm right as they at that time numberd 500 people (1st Corinthians 15:5-8) at the minimum from all over the land including non-Galileans.

Then I thirdly made the point that according to Acts 2:7 all of the tongues speakers were Galileans, therefore logically as the Church included non-Galileans, and yet Oneness Pentecsotals also claim that 120 spoke in tongues at Pentecost, this number being the entire Church, you have a contradiction from a Oneness perspective.

This was why i raised this question in post one.

Rob

Originally Posted by HeavenlyOne

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'.

Well I'm a Trinitarian, are you saying that I'm a non-Christian and unsaved becasue of that? Or do you accept me as brother in Christ despite my Trinitarianism? If the former is your reply, then isn't that cultic; calling Trinitarians non-Christians? If the latter then what's yoru problem with Biblical discussion, don't you see that you can learn as you engage with other?

Originally Posted by Falla39

I have a feeling PaPaDon could dialogue along these lines!

Blessings,

Falla39

Hello Falla,

Do you have any comments to make about the content of my arguments or my use of scripture? if you do I'd appreciate your comments please.

Originally Posted by Praxeas

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.

Well if that's wrong, why then do you also do exactly the same thing yourself as I do and occasionally post your own posts too? Most of my replies are my own work as in the case of the approximate 12-15 posts which I've posted today, but I admit that if I start a post then just over half are posts which I've thought about for years and stored on my pc.

[OGIA]

Originally Posted by Iron_Bladder

Well I'm a Trinitarian, are you saying that I'm a non-Christian and unsaved becasue of that?

Hi IB:

I am one who will tell you that I wouldn't want to be in your shoes believing that the Lord Jesus Christ is not THE One God of the Bible. If you choose to take that chance, there's not much anyone can do but God Himself.

Originally Posted by Iron_Bladder

If you can prove me wrong, then hey, I'll admit to error and change.

...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.

I doubt you'd change, IB, but here goes:

The proof that the 120 (understanding that this is not an exact number) spoke with tongues begins BEFORE the event, not after as you seem to try to prove:

Acts 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,)
16 Men and brethren...

Peter addressed the 120 as "Men and brethren". When you finish the chapter, you'll find that Peter never stops and addresses the 11 directly. That means that all of the "they's" in the remaining portion of that chapter must then refer to the 120. In fact, "they" even "prayed...and gave forth their lots" (v.26)

Knowing that Luke didn't stop and change subjects just because someone inserted another chapter here, we see this same "they" in Acts 2:1:

And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place.


Having established that the "they" of Acts 2:1 does identify the 120, let's insert what that pronoun identifies:

1 And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they (the 120) were all with one accord in one place.
2 And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they (the 120) were sitting.
3 And there appeared unto them (the 120) cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them (the 120) .
4 And they (the 120) were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them (the 120) utterance.

For the record, I don't know of any trinitarian Pentecostals besides Iron Bladder that believes only 12 spoke in tongues on the day of Pentecost.

[bishopnl]

Originally Posted by Iron_Bladder

Hello Bishopnl, I think that we've crossed lines, possibly you havn't understood my points in post one. So to reply to your first comment, they wen't speaking 16 dialects but approximately 12 languages and 4 dialects of sopme of those languages.

Secondly, the standard pentecostal position on the 120 is that they comprised the entire Christian Church at the time of Acts 1, this then expanded to 3,120 at Acts 2. My point in rebuttal is that as not every Christian was a Galilean, therefore the number 120 could not have comprised the entire Christian Church, and I'm right as they at that time numberd 500 people (1st Corinthians 15:5-8) at the minimum from all over the land including non-Galileans.

Then I thirdly made the point that according to Acts 2:7 all of the tongues speakers were Galileans, therefore logically as the Church included non-Galileans, and yet Oneness Pentecsotals also claim that 120 spoke in tongues at Pentecost, this number being the entire Church, you have a contradiction from a Oneness perspective.

This was why i raised this question in post one.

Rob

I'm not sure where you are getting the 4 dialects and 12 languages thing. Do you have source information for that? I'm not saying you're wrong, only that I'd like to know where you got that information from.

The 16 different cultures/countries mentioned:

Parthi
Media or Madai
Elam
Mesopatamia
Judea
Cappadocia
Pontus
Asia
Phrygia
Pamphylia
Egypt
Parts of Libya (near Cyrene)
Rome

Its true that some of those places probably spoke Persian, just different dialects. But every language mentioned is either a language or a distinct dialect of a language such as Persian or Greek (which are not listed). If, in fact, you are going to say that places like Pontus, Cappadocia, Phrygia and Pamphylia are just different dialects of Asian, commentators (such as Albert Barnes) say that the Asia referenced by the onlookers was most likely another part of Asia farther west than these.

I don't have time to address any more right at the moment. Maybe later.