Acts 2: Then and Now

[JoeHardy07]

Originally Posted by onefaith2

If all the material so far relates to earthly tongues, what are we to make of the reference to the tongues of men and angels? Let's look at the context:

If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. If I give all I possess to the poor and surrender my body to the flames, but have not love, I gain nothing.

(1 Corinthians 13:1-3 NIV)

Paul is talking in superlatives in order to make a point. He is not talking about ordinary tongues any more than he is talking about ordinary prophecy or ordinary faith. He is saying if he has the ultimate in these gifts, the fullness of these gifts, so that he has "all faith" (literal Greek), fathoms "all mysteries", has "all knowledge", and all languages (the tongues of men and the angels) but not love, he is nothing. The text allows for angelic tongues but imply that these are exceptional.

http://www.alanmarshall.org/essays/TonguesOfAngels.htm

Alan Marshall can make up all the jargon he wants to about tongues of angels. There's only one verse, and that only a fraction, which mentions anything that would even remotely imply an angelic language; and that is subjective. Anyone can make a scripture line up with an experience and call it truth.

[onefaith2]

Study on angels http://www.scripturessay.com/printpage.php?id=2

I suggest you study all angels before you refuse something because you don't agree with it.

[JoeHardy07]

Indeed.

[pastor RICK]

Originally Posted by JoeHardy07

The first scripture verse I was taught in Sunday School as a child was Acts 2:38, and I'm sure it is still the first verse most children of the faith are taught to memorize.

Acts chapter two seems to be the main reference for all things "Holy Ghost" related. When someone asks about tongues or the infilling of the Spirit, we always point them to Acts chapter two - the birth of Pentecostalism. Even Peter, in Acts chapter 11, refered back to the first Holy Ghost experience when defending the Gentiles receiving of the gift. Acts chapter two is the foundation of the Apostolic/Pentecostal faith. And I believe it is also the foundation upon which every other recorded Holy Ghost out-pouring or reference in the Bible stands.

However, everytime I read this passage, or any other similar passage, I always encounter conflicts between what I've been taught is Holy Ghost, and what is recorded in the Word. I'd like to discuss some of these inconsistencies. They may seem small and insignificant, but I'd like to cover them nonetheless, just to be thorough.


1. These are not drunken, as ye suppose - the signs of the out-pouring

I've always been fed that Peter's words meant "These men and women are not drunk in the way you think they are. That somehow what Peter is saying is "These men and women ARE drunk, but not like you think they are. They are drunk on the Spirit!" if they didnt act drunk why were they accused are you saying only because of the speak they were useing>??/ i seen alot of people get the holy ghost some .spoke in tongues forever and had to be carried to their cars and drove home. couldnt walk.. were they of the devil. is so the devil made them change their enitre life and start working for god . i believe they acted drunk as well as spoke in other tongues . NOT EARTHLY tongues as you have said ,the bible plainly says they spoke as the spirit moved.

This is an error. When the onlookers heard the disciples speaking in tongues, they were amazed, confused (1 Cor. 14:2), doubtful, and some mocked - calling them drunken.

Look at Peter's words:

"...for these are not drunken, as ye suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day..."deadling with the time of day ,not the acts of being drunk or not.

Notice the how the "as ye suppose" is offset by commas. I believe this means, "You suppose these are drunken, but they aren't. It's only the third hour of the day!"thats only your opinion.

I must disagree with every preacher/evangelist who ever said, "Peter didn't deny they were drunk! He knew they were drunk!" I believe Peter was saying just the opposite.you have that right i disagree with anyone who says they werent .

If I'm right, and this is what Peter was saying, then it leaves a whole lot of explaining for those who embrace our more...modern...signs of the out pouring as "drunkeness," because now they have no firm ground to stand on when trying to explain:

Slain in the Spirit
Slurred Speach
Moaning/Wailing WE STILL DO ALL OF THAT.
Sobbing/Screaming and tears
Reeling, running and jumping


I believe I am right, by Peter's next words...Read on in Acts 2


Peter informs them that what is going on (which is, by the way, ONLY speaking in tongues) is the fulfilled prophecy of the out-pouring of God's Spirit. He then lists what the effects of the out-pouring will be:

prophecy
visions
dreams
we still do all of this ,you must be at the wrong church.

Why are none of our modern signs recorded in this list? And why are they nowhere to be found in Acts 4, 8, 10, or 19 either when the Holy Ghost was again poured out?the knew thats how it came ..

I'm not seeking to rid the church of all emotion. LOL!!!!! Just pondering this. i would think thats probably what your after to a degree.



2. We do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God.

Everytime someone recieves the "Holy Ghost" nowadays, they speak in a "heavenly language," just like in Acts 2, right?

Wrong.RIGHT everytime or they didnt get it .

In Acts chapter 2 the tongues were not a "heavenly" language. They were earthly languages. We can argue all day about this, but the Word is very clear. What those onlookers heard were the tongues of earth. The substance of those words was heavenly (praise to God) but the words themselves were undeniably earthly. YOU KEEP BEING WRONG,,it was aheavenly language , it was spirit sent by god .. every good and perfect gift comes from above..

So, who invented the idea that the intial evidence of recieving the Holy Ghost is speaking in a "heavenly" language?while its not the only sign ,, the bible says in acts 10;45= they of the circumsion which believed we astonished,,because that on the gentiles were given the holy ghost ,for they HEARD THEM SPEAK WITH TONGUES.,,



That's all I can think of right now. Maybe more later.


God Bless!

good luck with ur reading from here on out.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Godsdrummer

Context, context, I Cor. 13:1 is not speaking of the tongues of angels as a different type of tongues as you are trying to make it be. He is saying that though I am a great orator if I don't have love...

We get all the understanding of tongues in I cor. 14 that we need to understand where there place in the church is.

That does't explain "tongues of men and angels"

1Co 13:1 If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal.

this does suggest that tongues could be a langauge of men or angels

[JoeHardy07]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

That does't explain "tongues of men and angels"

1Co 13:1 If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal.

this does suggest that tongues could be a langauge of men or angels

I'd say neither camp has much of anything to back up an argument on this. So, I say if an extraterrestrial language was needed for salvation or even super-spirituality, it would have been further covered in the Word.

Fact is, it isn't.

Without question, every major form of tongues that is discussed thouroughly in the Bible, which happens to be only one, reads of only earthly tongues. At the very core, this "heavenly language" idea is speculation and human invention. There is simply nothing to support it. No soul on earth can deny this.

Didn't say it was wrong or even bad. It's just cannot be thouroughly supported and is therefore, it would seem, irrelevant.

[onefaith2]

Originally Posted by JoeHardy07

I'd say neither camp has much of anything to back up an argument on this. So, I say if an extraterrestrial language was needed for salvation or even super-spirituality, it would have been further covered in the Word.

Fact is, it isn't.

Without question, every major form of tongues that is discussed thouroughly in the Bible, which happens to be only one, reads of only earthly tongues. At the very core, this "heavenly language" idea is speculation and human invention. There is simply nothing to support it. No soul on earth can deny this.

Didn't say it was wrong or even bad. It's just cannot be thouroughly supported and is therefore, it would seem, irrelevant.

You either contradicted yourself with the two bolded statements or you like the non evidence of earthly tongues only better than the nonevidence of heavenly tongues.

If Paul were around, we could ask him or tell him thats an irrevelant statement.

[JoeHardy07]

This is getting out of hand.

[onefaith2]

Originally Posted by JoeHardy07

This is getting out of hand.

such is the case when you have multiple minds processing a statement

[JoeHardy07]

Originally Posted by onefaith2

You either contradicted yourself with the two bolded statements or you like the non evidence of earthly tongues only better than the nonevidence of heavenly tongues.

If Paul were around, we could ask him or tell him thats an irrevelant statement.

Here is what I did not say: Paul is stupid. Paul was a raving idiot. Tongues are irrelevant.

Here is what I did say(or tried to say): The heavenly tongues idea is not an important issue.

There is plenty of evidence to support earthly languages. Acts 2 and 1 Cor. 14 both read extensively on the subject. There is no such detailing of this, and this is funny, man-made "heavenly language." I'd probably be correct in saying that this counterfeit was created somewhere near the early 20th century.

There may very well be a heavenly language, but it, or our idea of it, has become some trophy to be obtained to the point that we threaten people's salvation and spirituality with it.

It's ridiculous.