Initial evidence

[Tithesmeister]

Originally Posted by coksiw

So, they were all in the upper room, a private environment. The Spirit fell and began to speak in tongues.

What exactly you think it could have happened regarding how people noticed and then began to understand?

The assumption being made in this thread is that there is a loud mix of voices saying different things, and people outside were listening simultaneously and understanding simultaneously, which is hard to understand since such a thing would turn into a large blurry incomprehensible noise.

But this is what I find more probably, and less of need for the hypothesis that the listeners' ears were opened to understand it in their language.

The upper room got noisy. Have you heard a noisy party before not by the loud music but by the people inside talking loud?

A small group of curious people came close to the building, ... as they come closer to the ones speaking in tongues, they can distinguish their native language, while Peter is there also seeing the small group and listening to their conversation. The word spreads, more people come, they get through the crowd to the front and listen to the prayers closer and then go towards the back as they make comments about what they hear. All this happens while Peter is listening to the front of the crowd's comments as well. If Peter is listening is not that they are so into the prayers taken over by the Spirit that they are not having the chance to stop at times, and see and listen to the front of the curious crowd. Then, Peter starts his famous speech saying "these are not drunk"

Haven't you seen something like this happening before for other curious incidents where the crowd slowly grows, they come to the front to see it, and then stay or go to the back and exchange comments and have a laugh too? That's exactly how it happens.

It is likely not the case that 3000+ came at the same time, listened the mixed voices, listened to Peter, and all 3000 repented at the same time. It was likely a many hours process of people in/out, sharing their comments, testifying what they saw, spreading the word, etc... What you get in Acts then are just summary of the events, instead of less significant details. Perhaps only 500 to 1000 people heard Peter's initial speech, perhaps even less. The 3000 people being converted is said after it is also added that Peter preached more:

[Acts 2:40-41 KJV] 40 And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation. 41 Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day (this is a open enough statement to allow for a lengthy process of spreading words for hours) there were added [unto them] about three thousand souls.

I agree that this scenario is likely, but in the context of initial evidence, does it say that the “about three thousand souls” spoke in tongues? As initial evidence?
Or should we just believe that they did even though the scripture doesn’t say so?

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by coksiw

So, they were all in the upper room, a private environment. The Spirit fell and began to speak in tongues.

What exactly you think it could have happened regarding how people noticed and then began to understand?

The assumption being made in this thread is that there is a loud mix of voices saying different things, and people outside were listening simultaneously and understanding simultaneously, which is hard to understand since such a thing would turn into a large blurry incomprehensible noise.

But this is what I find more probably, and less of need for the hypothesis that the listeners' ears were opened to understand it in their language.

The upper room got noisy. Have you heard a noisy party before not by the loud music but by the people inside talking loud?

A small group of curious people came close to the building, ... as they come closer to the ones speaking in tongues, they can distinguish their native language, while Peter is there also seeing the small group and listening to their conversation. The word spreads, more people come, they get through the crowd to the front and listen to the prayers closer and then go towards the back as they make comments about what they hear. All this happens while Peter is listening to the front of the crowd's comments as well. If Peter is listening is not that they are so into the prayers taken over by the Spirit that they are not having the chance to stop at times, and see and listen to the front of the curious crowd. Then, Peter starts his famous speech saying "these are not drunk"

Haven't you seen something like this happening before for other curious incidents where the crowd slowly grows, they come to the front to see it, and then stay or go to the back and exchange comments and have a laugh too? That's exactly how it happens.

It is likely not the case that 3000+ came at the same time, listened the mixed voices, listened to Peter, and all 3000 repented at the same time. It was likely a many hours process of people in/out, sharing their comments, testifying what they saw, spreading the word, etc... What you get in Acts then are just summary of the events, instead of less significant details. Perhaps only 500 to 1000 people heard Peter's initial speech, perhaps even less. The 3000 people being converted is said after it is also added that Peter preached more:

[Acts 2:40-41 KJV] 40 And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation. 41 Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day (this is a open enough statement to allow for a lengthy process of spreading words for hours) there were added [unto them] about three thousand souls.

The text is pretty clear that whoever showed up heard the disciples praising God in the whoever's native dialect. Well except for the mockers who just thought the revivalists were on drugs.

Yes it probably was an all day thing, like most revival meetings.

[Amanah]

This was Esaias having a conversation with someone here a few years back, and this was how I posted it on Facebook in 2017, it just came up as a memory:

Someone asked: please show me where the Bible speaks of tongues as a gift and a distinction of tongues as initial evidence that someone has received the baptism of the Holy Ghost.

Someone answered: 1 Cor 12:9 lists "faith" as one of the gifts of the Spirit. It is said "to another, faith by the same Spirit". Thus, not everyone has the same gift, and that includes faith.

Yet, we know everyone who has the Spirit DOES have faith. So obviously, two different kinds of faith are in view. One, the faith everyone who receives the Spirit has. Two, the faith that certain Christians have as a special working of the Spirit. So then there is the faith that is universal among true believers, and then there is a special operation of faith imparted by the Spirit to certain believers for certain purposes. Not all believers have THAT special gift of "faith".

Just so with tongues.

[Amanah]

I was told yesterday by my Elder that this topic is being discussed by leadership. It was mentioned that while the most common initial evidence is tongues (probably because of what is written in James),
Bishop doesn't want to put God in a box by limiting Him to just one of the spiritual gifts. I didn't reply yet. I'm waiting for them to give me a final explanation before I reply. But I thought to myself, we can't put God in a box, but doesn't the word say He has exalted the Word above His name. So, doesn't God's Word put God in a box so to speak?

[Amanah]

The reason this is important is because if someone thinks they have the Holy Spirit because they have the gift of wisdom, but really they need to speak in tongues, they are being seriously misled.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Amanah

I was told yesterday by my Elder that this topic is being discussed by leadership. It was mentioned that while the most common initial evidence is tongues (probably because of what is written in James),
Bishop doesn't want to put God in a box by limiting Him to just one of the spiritual gifts. I didn't reply yet. I'm waiting for them to give me a final explanation before I reply. But I thought to myself, we can't put God in a box, but doesn't the word say He has exalted the Word above His name. So, doesn't God's Word put God in a box so to speak?

Isn’t that Don’s thought process concerning soteriology? His premise is that with a few verses God has given a plan B for those who have never heard the Gospel. Hence we who continue to point to scripture are somehow limiting God’s forgiveness. Don views you, Esaias, and myself as portraying God as too hard?
Putting God in a box how? Can God have my cat warn me verbally concerning impending doom? Well, we do have a talking donkey and snake in the Bible. Yet, God doesn’t continually use those vehicle to teach mankind. Can God transport us with fiery chariots across the world? We do have a verse? Yet, again this isn’t a mode of transportation for everyone. Rightly dividing the Word of God isn’t putting Him in a box.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Amanah

The reason this is important is because if someone thinks they have the Holy Spirit because they have the gift of wisdom, but really they need to speak in tongues, they are being seriously mislead.

Excellently put.

[Tithesmeister]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Isn’t that Don’s thought process concerning soteriology? His premise is that with a few verses God has given a plan B for those who have never heard the Gospel. Hence we who continue to point to scripture are somehow limiting God’s forgiveness. Don views you, Esaias, and myself as portraying God as too hard?
Putting God in a box how? Can God have my cat warn me verbally concerning impending doom? Well, we do have a talking donkey and snake in the Bible. Yet, God doesn’t continually use those vehicle to teach mankind. Can God transport us with fiery chariots across the world? We do have a verse? Yet, again this isn’t a mode of transportation for everyone. Rightly dividing the Word of God isn’t putting Him in a box.

I have personally heard animals speak several times in my life.

Mostly they were parrots.

Sometimes they were humans.

[coksiw]

Originally Posted by Esaias

The text is pretty clear that whoever showed up heard the disciples praising God in the whoever's native dialect. Well except for the mockers who just thought the revivalists were on drugs.

Yes it probably was an all day thing, like most revival meetings.

Yes, I'm not denying that. If someone hears our church speaking in tongues from distance, they just hear incomprehensible noise, however, we have heard testimonies of an Arabic unbeliever being in that many-speaking-in-tongues scenarios but much closer to the speakers, and understanding Sis Jennifer (to say a name) glorifying God in Arabic.

My point is that if the scenario on the Day of Pentecost was like a typical incident scenario where crowds slowly gathers, and curious Albert goes to the front to check it out, and hears sis Jennifer speaking in Arabic, and then Smith goes too and hears sis Sherri speaking in Chinese, and then they go back and comment about it, as other people do the same, you don't have to have a miracle on the listener. Just a typical dynamic can explain it.

[Amanah]

Pls seriously help me pray about this. I believe God can turn this around. I believe God can bring a revelation of truth, agree with me in Jesus name.