I can't say for sure that they did not talk about the cross or the resurrection in tongues. I can say for sure that Acts 2 does not tell us whether they did.
I think you may be putting too much pressure on yourself. No one is actually waiting for you (or at least I'm not) to agree with common sense observations about Acts 2...that this was an evangelistic effort..and that God had moved these these disciples to speak of the "mighty deeds of God".
I just use this thread to try and show the wildly contradictory, illogical aspect to Pentecostal doctrines. And you're certainly aiding in that regard. I think (hope) folks come to this thread and see someone like yourself denying with a straight face that these people were evangelizing in Acts 2...and then they think to themselves
"wow, this is what Pentecostals have to do with point-blank scriptures in order to prop up Pentecostal/Charismatic doctrines? Something is off somewhere."
That's the goal: To free folks from the bondage, and from being downtrodden by false doctrines. These folks are some of the most demoralized, discouraged believers in all of Christendom...because the
honest ones are saying to themselves "gosh,
I can't speak in a tongue,
I've never seen a Jesus-style miracle, the Lord of Glory has never visited
me while I was in the bathroom shaving in the morning (or whatever other 'tall tale' some of you guys come up with). I've watched this beat-down going on first hand, and i try to do something about it. Thus my humble little contribution here at this little discussion board thread.
Raising Jesus from the dead is one of God's mighty works. But so is creation. So is splitting the Red Sea. We aren't told which ones they spoke about.
And those are all scriptures. And
"all scripture is profitable...for instruction in righteousness".
In other words, ALL scripture is leading man to God and to salvation. All scripture is fundamentally evangelistic. Therefore, the hairs you're trying to split in Acts 2 do not exist. You are contradicting Scripture.
This is very true. But it does not say all the ideas that pop into men's head when they read the Bible, which are not taught in the Bible, are profitable for doctrine.
These people were moved by the Spirit that day to present the Gospel message. They were, according to direct statements in the text, preaching the
"mighty deeds of God". Your silly, flippant remark that they may have very well done nothing more than spout
"some ideas that popped into their head"...again, I'm not sure how that is anything short of deliberate obnoxiousness. You are becoming my Exhibit A.
You should tone it back. There was nothing disinegeous to my comment. You were putting a level of harshness in the mouths of Pentecostals that certainly isn't typical.
I would argue, you need to take responsibility for the consequences of these false teachings. For you to deny that there had been that
exact quote, to me was insincere misdirection of the discussion. I clarified that you and others have said
exactly that, only with different words:
You believe that when someone at your church stands up and utters incomprehensible babbling and then a visiting inquirer consequently staggers out of the church, dismayed, disillusioned by the chaos, and permanently apostatized...that you are then entitled to say (whether out loud or in your mind):
"Aha..there goes someone with insufficient faith!".
And IN REALITY what has happened is...you and your other church members have acted in disobedience to 1Cor.14 in which the Bible instructs us to
NOT behave in such a way as to cause others to say "you're mad".
Matt TooFor: And no matter how badly you turn 1Cor.14 on its head...Paul, in very plain wording, is instructing that you NOT behave in such a way as to cause people to say "you're mad".
presidente: I would agree with that part.
Well then, you are disagreeing with
yourself - lol! Pentecostals disobey that instruction practically every Sunday of the year.
What you are doing is...you are divorcing the "tongues" of 1Cor.14 from the seminal definitions for "tongues' provided in the home passage on tongues - Acts 2. THEN of course, you will
deny that you have done so.
But the "tongues" practiced in Pentecostal churches bears no resemblance to Acts 2...where there were numbers of foreigners who heard the Word of God presented in their own language, they were then shocked and astonished...and it was all spectacularly confirmed amongst themselves...and there was this undeniable spectacularly miraculous aspect.
There are no Russians (etc.) showing up at your church each week who are astonished and amazed to hear their own language spoken perfectly, and where they then observe yet another person perfectly translating this language (for the benefit of non-Russian speaking people).
So...you create a different kind of "tongues" where NO ONE is hearing their foreign language spoken...NO FOREIGNER is there to confirm the miracle...and therefore, in NO WAY is the Acts 2 scenario being replicated.
And then of course you deny you are creating a different "tongues" than what is in the Bible (Acts 2)...and then proceed to claim nevertheless that a "miracle"
DID happen.
It is all a gigantic, gargantuan, enormous, chaotic mess which leaves a trail of heartbroken inquirers in its wake. I know it firsthand.
I've seen the injury and spiritual devastation caused by Charismatic/Pentecostal claims of false "tongues", false "miracles", and all the anti-biblical exclusivism
"God gave me a second blessing" "I received a special anointing and visitation from God"...on and on. A gigantic mess.
But hey, you guys are in good company: Conservative Evangelicalism has its own dysfunctions. Overall, organized conservative religion in America (whether non-Charismatic fundamentalists and Evangelicals or Pentecostals/Charismatics) is one giant trainwreck. And here we are, five minutes from the return of the King, give or take a few years or decades.
