You can find a bit of a study Here on that subject...
I just read the study. It's great imo. Did you write this?
You can find a bit of a study Here on that subject...
Quoting this passage without comment does not help anyone to understand what happened and why it happened. For whatever reason, there are A FEW instances in the Acts of the Apostles recorded that when Gentiles believed on the Lord Jesus Christ, they spoke in tongues. Those converted in the household of Cornelius is another example. It would appear that this manifestation was for the sake of the Jews who needed to learn that God was also saving Gentiles, and the proof that the gift of the Holy Spirit was given to them was their ability to speak in GENUINE FOREIGN LANGUAGES supernaturally. Bible tongues are invariably languages, not babbling.
But as we can see in the rest of the book of Acts, this was not the norm for every sinner who got saved. The thousands of Jews who were saved on the day of Pentecost, and shortly thereafter, did NOT speak in tongues after they received the Holy Spirit. Neither did the Ethiopian eunuch nor the Philippian keeper of the prison, nor many others recorded in Acts.
So anyone who teaches that the evidence of receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost is that the person MUST speak in tongues is not really teaching the truth.
To be clear Tongues was a old English translation of a word that meant in Greek : Language.
Specifically, a language native to the speaker. So in Acts 2, when it says " other Tongues " its saying God is communicating with all languages so all people no matter where they are from, hear and understand the message in their own specific innate language. To all At the same time, with one speakers. No babel .
Tongues does Not mean a language of angels, Nor a prayer language. Dont let that confusing spread .
That is bad doctrines people weave from ignorance of what they're reading .
You can't follow what I'm saying because yer going the 'other way'.Speak2Me can you follow what you read ? Or do you just add things by mistake ?
maybe got too much cobwebs gathering in the attic at your old age.
The phrase "" tongues of men and of angels "" is meant to convey being more then capable with language as a meant to effectively communicate .
. Paul did not say its a specific language.
Mentioned in context as hyperbole. Context is essential to arriving at a correct interpretation of the passage. Context prevents improper proof texting.Languages of angels was mentioned by Paul.
You're not one of those people that believes Heaven's language is ENGLISH, are you?![]()
Tongues are a gift of the Holy Spirit. Probably the most common gift given.Alright...
So we have a lot of discussion about tongues going on here.. that is what happened in Acts 2.
But what do you see in Acts 2?
* These are already saved people.
* They are gathered as an assembly... they are not individuals alone
* They were a local New Testament church before the Holy Spirit empowered their church.. that had Jesus as the founder before Penteost
So.. further examples of the Holy Spirit empowering .. are like this.. of assemblies of already saved believers.. being empowered.
Where are the examples of individuals alone being empowered this way? Baptised with the Holy Spirit .. for the individual alone?
To:wattie
Theres no indication any of these people believe in Christ in Acts two,the address from Peter was teaching them about Christ, and a call to repent and believe . Acts 2.
Im unsure why you concluded these are Christians ? Can you Document this statement ??
Act 2:36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.
37 Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?
38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
The Church could not come into existence until the Holy Spirit was poured down from Heaven, and that could only happen after the Lord Jesus Christ had ascended to Heaven and sent down (with the Father) the Holy Spirit. So there was no "church" on earth until Christ's resurrection and ascension, and it was only after His resurrection that the Lord gave the apostles the Holy Spirit, and it was only at Pentecost that they received the empowerment of the Holy Spirit in order to fulfil their ministries.Jesus and His disciples were the first church. They were there first at Pentecost.
They were an assembly of believers before Pentecost.
Peter indeed spoke to others to repent but there was the already saved assembly there first
The Church could not come into existence until the Holy Spirit was poured down from Heaven, and that could only happen after the Lord Jesus Christ had ascended to Heaven and sent down (with the Father) the Holy Spirit. So there was no "church" on earth until Christ's resurrection and ascension, and it was only after His resurrection that the Lord gave the apostles the Holy Spirit, and it was only at Pentecost that they received the empowerment of the Holy Spirit in order to fulfil their ministries.
This term.. has been taken to mean a whole lot of things but what is it really?
Penny for your thoughts