Only 12 spoke in tongues at Pentecost

Originally Posted by Praxeas

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.

OK here is my reply, written last night:

Although the context is the 120 men and women at Acts 1:15, can’t you see that the context changes from the 120 men and women to the 11 apostles from Acts 1:20? What do you think is the meaning of; ‘and his bishoprick let another take,’ or as the NIV renders it; ‘May another take his place of leadership.’ Women weren’t ever leaders in the Church and so the context here changes from the 120 men and women to the 11 apostles. The masculine pronoun ‘his’ as in ‘his bishoprick’ implies men alone, which again precludes the company of 120 men and women.

PS: I'm also looking at the masculine pronoun autos at Acts 1:20 and I hope to reply shortly once I've gone to the university library to look up this word.

Originally Posted by 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.

"these signs will follow those who have believed." (Mk 16:17, NASV).

KwaiQ the Greek word for believing at Mark 16:17 is the participle: pisteuo, numbered 4100 in Strongs, which is a participle in the aorist, active, dative, masculine plural. The NASV and ASV both bring out best the meaning of this participle when it states "have believed," implying an action prior to the accompanying future tense: past tense: “These signs will accompany those.” Now if Jesus had wished to indicate to us today, that the 3,000 who would become saved on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:41) would also speak in tongues, then he would instead have used two future tenses in his prophecy: ‘these signs WILL follow those who WILL believe.’

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Praxeas
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.

Originally Posted by Iron_Bladder

OK here is my reply, written last night:

Although the context is the 120 men and women at Acts 1:15, can’t you see that the context changes from the 120 men and women to the 11 apostles from Acts 1:20? What do you think is the meaning of; ‘and his bishoprick let another take,’ or as the NIV renders it; ‘May another take his place of leadership.’ Women weren’t ever leaders in the Church and so the context here changes from the 120 men and women to the 11 apostles. The masculine pronoun ‘his’ as in ‘his bishoprick’ implies men alone, which again precludes the company of 120 men and women.

PS: I'm also looking at the masculine pronoun autos at Acts 1:20 and I hope to reply shortly once I've gone to the university library to look up this word.

What in the world does this have to do with what you quoted me saying?

IF you continue to just ignore other peoples arguments just to make your own then you will have to take another vacation. Please address my previous several posts that you have not answered to or addressed each point, point by point, as you insist we do for you.

Your post here does not address any point I have made so far and infact totally ignores them

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Iron_Bladder

"these signs will follow those who have believed." (Mk 16:17, NASV).

KwaiQ the Greek word for believing at Mark 16:17 is the participle: pisteuo, numbered 4100 in Strongs, which is a participle in the aorist, active, dative, masculine plural. The NASV and ASV both bring out best the meaning of this participle when it states "have believed," implying an action prior to the accompanying future tense: past tense: “These signs will accompany those.” Now if Jesus had wished to indicate to us today, that the 3,000 who would become saved on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:41) would also speak in tongues, then he would instead have used two future tenses in his prophecy: ‘these signs WILL follow those who WILL believe.’

First of all an aorist tense is NOT past tense. It can only be permitted to be transated past tense depending on the context.

Second of all if these signs shall follow ONLY those that have already believed up till that point, that means Paul never spoke in tongues nor cast out devils nor healed the sick and that means nobody else, ever ever ever anywhere after this point was used to heal the sick, cast out devils or speak in tongues. Have you read the book of Acts or 1st Corinthians lately?

Aorist Tense
Tense-Aorist

The aorist tense is characterized by its emphasis on punctiliar
action; that is, the concept of the verb is considered without
regard for past, present, or future time. There is no
direct or clear English equivalent for this tense, though it is
generally rendered as a simple past tense in most translations.

The events described by the aorist tense are classified into a
number of categories by grammarians. The most common of these
include a view of the action as having begun from a certain
point ("inceptive aorist"), or having ended at a certain point
("cumulative aorist"), or merely existing at a certain point
("punctiliar aorist"). The categorization of other cases can
be found in Greek reference grammars.

The English reader need not concern himself with most of these
finer points concerning the aorist tense, since in most cases
they cannot be rendered accurately in English translation,
being fine points of Greek exegesis only. The common practice
of rendering an aorist by a simple English past tense should
suffice in most cases.

Lastly, if you are right, then NOBODY is saved according to Jesus
Joh 3:3 Jesus answered him, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God."

This is also the aorist tense. Born here is the aorist tense. Using your flawed logic then nobody after Jesus said that has seen the kingdom of God!!!

Same is true of being born of Water and Spirit. It's an aorist tense meaning in your flawed logic that nobody after Jesus spoke these words ENTERED the kingdom of heaven

Joh 3:5 Jesus answered, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born (aorist tense) of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.

I've pointed this out to you in the past and you ignored it then and I am sure you will ignore it again. You don't care about truth.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Iron_Bladder

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).

You are still ignoring my post where I proved my point. There is one group of people mentioned as to being present and hearing Peter's speech. Within that group of people are the 11 remaining apostles, men and women, and those men who were qualified to take Judas place.

[Falla39]

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

[KwaiQ]

Originally Posted by Iron_Bladder

"these signs will follow those who have believed." (Mk 16:17, NASV).

KwaiQ the Greek word for believing at Mark 16:17 is the participle: pisteuo, numbered 4100 in Strongs, which is a participle in the aorist, active, dative, masculine plural. The NASV and ASV both bring out best the meaning of this participle when it states "have believed," implying an action prior to the accompanying future tense: past tense: “These signs will accompany those.” Now if Jesus had wished to indicate to us today, that the 3,000 who would become saved on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:41) would also speak in tongues, then he would instead have used two future tenses in his prophecy: ‘these signs WILL follow those who WILL believe.’

That is transitive logic my friend. What He was saying here is when you receive the Spirit of Christ, you will speak in tongues as the initial evidence of receiving the Holy Spirit.

[Falla39]

Originally Posted by Iron_Bladder

"these signs will follow those who have believed." (Mk 16:17, NASV).

KwaiQ the Greek word for believing at Mark 16:17 is the participle: pisteuo, numbered 4100 in Strongs, which is a participle in the aorist, active, dative, masculine plural. The NASV and ASV both bring out best the meaning of this participle when it states "have believed," implying an action prior to the accompanying future tense: past tense: “These signs will accompany those.” Now if Jesus had wished to indicate to us today, that the 3,000 who would become saved on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:41) would also speak in tongues, then he would instead have used two future tenses in his prophecy: ‘these signs WILL follow those who WILL believe.’

In Luke 24:47-49, Jesus has just told his disciples that repentance

and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations,

beginning at, Jerusalem. He added that they were witnesses of these

things. vs.49, "And behold, I send the PROMISE of my Father upon you:

but tarry (wait) ye in the city of Jerusalem, UNTIL ye be endued with

power from on high. Those who would argue against receiving the Holy

Ghost, evidenced by speaking with other tongues, are only cheating

themselves and those who listen to them. They lack Power in their

lives. Paul said the gospel of Jesus Christ was the POWER of GOD unto

salvation, unto all that believe, first to the Jew and also to the Greek.

Acts 2:39, "For the PROMISE is unto you (Jews) and your children,

(Jewish children) and to ALL that are afar off, even as many as the

Lord our God shall call. (God is no respecter of persons). Why would

God be partial to a few of His children. John 1:12, "But as many as

received him, to them gave he power to become he sons of God, even

to them that believe on his name". Those who hear and believe the gospel

are all candidates for salvation. Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the

word of God.

Blessings,

Falla39