Only 12 spoke in tongues at Pentecost

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Iron_Bladder

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.

I don't. I have one post saved that is a reply this topic you started here. And in reply to your doing it, I did it. Otherwise you won't see me going from board to board and just reposting stuff I have saved from posting years ago.

BTW you gonna reply or not?

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Chan

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.

He isn't Pentecostal and he avoided my refutation of his argument.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

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 24:53 And 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

Please refute this Robert

Originally Posted by OGIA

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..

As a Trinitarian I believe that Jesus Christ the Son of God is Yahweh God incarnate in the flesh. It is Oneness folk who deny that the Son possesses (as the SON) divine attributes such as eternity, immutibility, creatorship, omnipresence etc.

Originally Posted by OGIA

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...

So Ogia how would you explain the double use of the pronoun “us” at Acts 1:22?: "Beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day that he was taken up from us, must one be a ordained to be a witness with us of his resurrection." (Acts 1:22, KJV). Because this pronoun ‘us’ which is here used twice cannot possibly refer to the 120 disciples who’re mentioned seven verses earlier (Acts 1:15), because ‘us’ implies specifically the 11 apostles who were choosing another man (Acts 1:21) to join the office of the 12 apostles, and yet the company of 120 comprised both men and also women. The specific use of the word ‘men’ in the plural at Acts 1:21, negates the possibility that women were active in replacing Judas.

This is why at Acts 1:20 (KJV) we read; “For it is written in the book of Psalms, Let his habitation be desolate, and let no man dwell therein: and his bishoprick let another take.” The NIV here reads; ‘May another take his place of leadership.’ Now this emphasis upon leadership must imply the leadership of the 12 apostles within the Church, and it’s a fatuous argument to reason as you have Ogia that every one of the 120 men and women were also leaders in the Church together with the 12 apostles, for the 120 wern't leaders; some were women who wern't allowed to hold leadership in the Church.

So Judas’ replacement was here being chosen at Acts 1:20-26 by 11 men and not by 120 men and women. The chosen person was expecting to join the 11 apostles and not to become one of 120 leaders in the Church! And because no women ever had a place of leadership in the Church, men were here choosing another man to replace Judas.

[OGIA]

Originally Posted by Iron_Bladder

So Ogia how would you explain the double use of the pronoun “us” at Acts 1:22?: "Beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day that he was taken up from us, must one be a ordained to be a witness with us of his resurrection." (Acts 1:22, KJV). Because this pronoun ‘us’ which is here used twice cannot possibly refer to the 120 disciples who’re mentioned seven verses earlier (Acts 1:15), because ‘us’ implies specifically the 11 apostles who were choosing another man (Acts 1:21) to join the office of the 12 apostles, and yet the company of 120 comprised both men and also women. The specific use of the word ‘men’ in the plural at Acts 1:21, negates the possibility that women were active in replacing Judas.

I don't see what a "double use" of the pronoun changes? Peter NEVER stops addressing the 120 once he begins speaking in v15. Unless you can show this, then the "they" all the way through Acts 2:4 refers to the 120.

This is why at Acts 1:20 (KJV) we read; “For it is written in the book of Psalms, Let his habitation be desolate, and let no man dwell therein: and his bishoprick let another take.” The NIV here reads; ‘May another take his place of leadership.’ Now this emphasis upon leadership must imply the leadership of the 12 apostles within the Church, and it’s a fatuous argument to reason as you have Ogia that every one of the 120 men and women were also leaders in the Church together with the 12 apostles, for the 120 wern't leaders; some were women who wern't allowed to hold leadership in the Church.

I'm not sure what you're point is? No, I'm not saying that all 120 were in leadership, but does that preclude them from "praying...and casting lots"? Plus, even if the women didn't vote, the men certainly numbered more than 11.

And because no women ever had a place of leadership in the Church, men were here choosing another man to replace Judas.

Again, even if it were only men "voting", there were still more than 11.

Praxeas said: Please refute this Robert



If you split it up into single point posts then I will. However is this a saved post which you've reposted from your hard drive, or did you write this post afresh? I ask this because your post is extremely confusing and it's not clear if your quoting from my origional post (which has been revised many times since you first saw it and possibly saved it), secondly, your posting is over long and it's not clear even to me if yoru quoting from my post in portions or if all of your post is yoru own work in it's entirety.

I'll look forward to replying, but please make your post shorter into say 5 or 6 posts and clear.

[bishopnl]

If you split it up into single point posts then I will. However is this a saved post which you've reposted from your hard drive, or did you write this post afresh? I ask this because your post is extremely confusing and it's not clear if your quoting from my origional post (which has been revised many times since you first saw it and possibly saved it), secondly, your posting is over long and it's not clear even to me if yoru quoting from my post in portions or if all of your post is yoru own work in it's entirety.

That's a bit rich considering your initial post.

[bishopnl]

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.

Where are you getting this information on "the standard pentecostal position?" I doubt any Apostolic would deny that more than 120 had believed on the resurrection of Christ. It was 120 who returned to Jerusalem to await the promise of the father.

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.

I'm sorry, I still don't follow. You are saying that it is impossible for 120 Galileans to be in one place at the same time? Out of all the people that had witnessed Christ's resurrection, are you saying that 120 of those could NOT have been Galileans, or what?

Praxeas said: 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!



My reply: OK here goes, at Acts 1:22?: "Beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day that he was taken up from us, must one be a ordained to be a witness with us of his resurrection." (Acts 1:22, KJV). we find that this pronoun ‘us’ which is here used twice cannot possibly refer to the 120 disciples who’re mentioned seven verses earlier (Acts 1:15), because ‘us’ implies specifically the 11 apostles who were choosing another man (Acts 1:21) to join the office of the 12 apostles, and yet the company of 120 comprised both men and also women. The specific use of the word ‘men’ in the plural at Acts 1:21, negates the possibility that women were active in replacing Judas.

This is why at Acts 1:20 (KJV) we read; “For it is written in the book of Psalms, Let his habitation be desolate, and let no man dwell therein: and his bishoprick let another take.” The NIV here reads; ‘May another take his place of leadership.’ Now this emphasis upon leadership must imply the leadership of the 12 apostles within the Church, and it’s a fatuous argument to reason that every one of the 120 men and women were also leaders in the Church together with the 12 apostles. So Judas’ replacement was here being chosen at Acts 1:20-26 by 11 men and not by 120 men and women. The chosen person was expecting to join the 11 apostles and not to become one of 120 leaders in the Church! And because no women ever had a place of leadership in the Church, men were here choosing another man to replace Judas.