Challenging the theory of interpretive hearing in Acts chapter two

[Sketch]

This is in reference to the idea that those on the day of Pentecost, at the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, did not actually speak in tongues, but those listening "heard" in their own tongue, or manifested the spiritual gift of the interpretation of tongues to hear in their own language.

I had not heard this theory until this year. And frankly, I don't buy it.

So, this thread is to hear both sides of the argument. I will argue against.
Do your civil best to convince me otherwise. Thanks.

Here are my points against the theory:

1) Those in the upper room did in fact speak in tongues.
"All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them." - Acts 2:4

2) Those who heard were bewildered. What is bewildering about hearing someone speak in your own language?
Or, how would they know the speaker was speaking their own language, not that of the hearer?
"When they heard this sound, a crowd came together in bewilderment, because each one heard their own language being spoken. " - Acts 2:6

3) We are not told that the hearing was a result of anything other than tongues speaking.

4) The interpretation of tongues is a manifestation of the Holy Spirit. Why would these unconverted listeners be manifesting the spiritual gift of the interpretation of tongues? Peter confirmed that they had not yet received the Holy Spirit.
"Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." - Acts 2:38

 

[Dino246]

It amazes me that anyone argues that it was a miracle of hearing rather than of speaking, when verse 4 completely debunks that.

 

[JaumeJ]

This is in reference to the idea that those on the day of Pentecost, at the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, did not actually speak in tongues, but those listening "heard" in their own tongue, or manifested the spiritual gift of the interpretation of tongues to hear in their own language.

I had not heard this theory until this year. And frankly, I don't buy it.

So, this thread is to hear both sides of the argument. I will argue against.
Do your civil best to convince me otherwise. Thanks.

Here are my points against the theory:

1) Those in the upper room did in fact speak in tongues.
"All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them." - Acts 2:4

2) Those who heard were bewildered. What is bewildering about hearing someone speak in your own language?
Or, how would they know the speaker was speaking their own language, not that of the hearer?
"When they heard this sound, a crowd came together in bewilderment, because each one heard their own language being spoken. " - Acts 2:6

3) We are not told that the hearing was a result of anything other than tongues speaking.

4) The interpretation of tongues is a manifestation of the Holy Spirit. Why would these unconverted listeners be manifesting the spiritual gift of the interpretation of tongues? Peter confirmed that they had not yet received the Holy Spirit.
"Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." - Acts 2:38

They were taken aback to hear all of the disciples speaking in their individual tongue because they knw the men were "unlearned,2 that is to say not educated beyond their trades.

 

[Lafftur]

This is in reference to the idea that those on the day of Pentecost, at the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, did not actually speak in tongues, but those listening "heard" in their own tongue, or manifested the spiritual gift of the interpretation of tongues to hear in their own language.

I had not heard this theory until this year. And frankly, I don't buy it.

So, this thread is to hear both sides of the argument. I will argue against.
Do your civil best to convince me otherwise. Thanks.

Here are my points against the theory:

1) Those in the upper room did in fact speak in tongues.
"All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them." - Acts 2:4

2) Those who heard were bewildered. What is bewildering about hearing someone speak in your own language?
Or, how would they know the speaker was speaking their own language, not that of the hearer?
"When they heard this sound, a crowd came together in bewilderment, because each one heard their own language being spoken. " - Acts 2:6

3) We are not told that the hearing was a result of anything other than tongues speaking.

4) The interpretation of tongues is a manifestation of the Holy Spirit. Why would these unconverted listeners be manifesting the spiritual gift of the interpretation of tongues? Peter confirmed that they had not yet received the Holy Spirit.
"Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." - Acts 2:38

It amazes me that anyone argues that it was a miracle of hearing rather than of speaking, when verse 4 completely debunks that.

@Sketch and @Dino246 - I agree with both of you that the Holy Spirit was indwelling and mightily manifesting the spiritual gift of speaking in tongues with great joy and jubilee in the 120 believers that were in the upper room which had descended into the streets of Jerusalem with Peter.

The Jews that were dispersed in other regions that had returned to Jerusalem for Pentecost and were amazed that they heard their own language spoken instead of the Hebrew dialect.

 

[JaumeJ]

@Sketch and @Dino246 - I agree with both of you that the Holy Spirit was indwelling and mightily manifesting the spiritual gift of speaking in tongues with great joy and jubilee in the 120 believers that were in the upper room which had descended into the streets of Jerusalem with Peter.

The Jews that were dispersed in other regions that had returned to Jerusalem for Pentecost and were amazed that they heard their own language spoken instead of the Hebrew dialect.

Hello Laftur, is 120 people in theupper room a typo?

 

[p_rehbein]

An Interesting Article about this:

(excerpt)

The languages they heard are listed and it is possible to group these in twelve by number, indicating that each of the twelve apostles was speaking a different language. [Acts 2:9-11] Now, at this moment Acts 2:14, 15 states: �Now Peter rose with the eleven and raised his voice, declaring to them: �Men, Jews, and all those dwelling in Jerusalem, all of you know this and listen to my words! For these men [OUTOI] are not drunk as you suppose, for it is only nine in the morning!� Two things indicate that only twelve are present. First, �Peter rose with the eleven� harmonizes with the observation that these were all Galileans. Also, the Greek OUTOI indicates a number of men.

(found here)

http://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=AwrJ...cost.php/RK=2/RS=1WPoFFBCyKDM9J71DAXILpYGmdE-

A couple of other Sites that speak of the number of people in the upper room......and at Pentecost.....apparently, they differ

https://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=Awr...6bbdbe53/RK=2/RS=yJNoqtce7Za6_W1hz42w2tf1Pjw-


http://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=AwrJ...entecost/RK=2/RS=1dx.GcS0HoHCOjv.h.BbEY0UkvI-

 

[JaumeJ]

Anumber is a representation, sometimes a number means something completely unakin to what it is. Seven times seventyi,. A wekk of years and more. Sometimes seven is infinite…...

Bottom line, God's ways are not our ways. I shy away from expert and prefer to wait instead of explaining certain aspects of god's teach and how H teaches us…..but th is just I.

I pray not to offend anyone.

 

[Lafftur]

Hello Laftur, is 120 people in theupper room a typo?

Hi JaumeJ,

No, no typo. I always thought there were 120 gathered in the upper room. It's what I've been told, however, your question made me look it up in the Bible and I do not see any reference to 120. It doesn't give an exact number. Very interesting!

Thank you!

 

[Lafftur]

Also, I'm assuming that the people were all devout "Jews" but the Bible just says "devout men."

However, the good news wasn't yet given to the Gentiles yet, but there were probably Gentiles there in Jerusalem that day.........hmmmm

Was it just Jews that heard the disciples speak in their own language or Gentiles also that heard?

 

[JaumeJ]

Hi JaumeJ,

No, no typo. I always thought there were 120 gathered in the upper room. It's what I've been told, however, your question made me look it up in the Bible and I do not see any reference to 120. It doesn't give an exact number. Very interesting!

Thank you!

My understanding of this is Twelve, but that and ninety cents will not buy a capu at Staruck's, not that I would want one.

 

[Nehemiah6]

I had not heard this theory until this year. And frankly, I don't buy it.

Neither do I, and there are no two sides to this. One side is patently false.

 

[Deade]

Anumber is a representation, sometimes a number means something completely unakin to what it is. Seven times seventyi,. A wekk of years and more. Sometimes seven is infinite…...

Bottom line, God's ways are not our ways. I shy away from expert and prefer to wait instead of explaining certain aspects of god's teach and how H teaches us…..but th is just I.

I pray not to offend anyone.

I am with you here. Language is such an imperfect tool to communicate spiritual matters, it will always leave us doubting what was really said. The good news is we do not have to make any definitive conclusion about a certain scripture, instantly. People having a need to decipher all scripture, at their own ideal time is where all the false doctrines originate. Best to wait on the Lord.

 

[garee]

Here are my points against the theory:

Hi thanks .I would offer first and foremost we look to the foundation of the fulfillment of Acts .A old testament law that had to do with the unbelieving Jew (no faith) that mocked God by refusing to hear His prophecy. But rather did whatsoever their own mouth as oral traditions declared and in doing so made the word of God without effect and so no evil in doing so .

With mocking deriding (stammering) lips God mocked those who mocked Him as a sign to confirm or a sign against them that were not hearing God's word. God therefore would no longer be bringing prophecy in Hebrew alone (the language they mocked God with.)

1)

Those in the upper room did in fact speak in tongues.
"All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them." - Acts 2:4

They all spoke in other languages to include Hebrew as God worked in them to make it possible for them to hear the gospel and believe to the salvation of their soul.Three thousand new converts at the same time from many different nation heard the interpretation of God's revelation.

2)

Those who heard were bewildered. What is bewildering about hearing someone speak in your own language?
Or, how would they know the speaker was speaking their own language, not that of the hearer?
"When they heard this sound, a crowd came together in bewilderment, because each one heard their own language being spoken. " - Acts 2:6

What bewildered them is previously they could not understand each other and they wondered why God was now bringing his interpretation as prophecy in other languages other than Hebrew.

3) We are not told that the hearing was a result of anything other than tongues speaking.

Yes, hearing prophecy in other languages and not Hebrew alone as up till that time... now came the fulfillment of the old testament prophecy (Isaiah 28)

4)

The interpretation of tongues is a manifestation of the Holy Spirit. Why would these unconverted listeners be manifesting the spiritual gift of the interpretation of tongues? Peter confirmed that they had not yet received the Holy Spirit.
"Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." - Acts 2:38

The unconverted listeners were converted when they heard the gospel in their own tongue.3000 souls entered paradise all in the twinkling of the eye.

 

[JaumeJ]

Theory! Do we now approach our Father as more than a child? Are we now theorizing on His Word like some kind of intellectual or scientist?

Yes, we may make a determination without concluding until it is confirmed by the Holy Spirit, but theorizing? Forgive me but that is a bit strong bringing me to consider how we are advised not to destroy ourselves with waht is falsely calle knowledge (knowledge is also translated as science.)

 

[garee]

Anumber is a representation, sometimes a number means something completely unakin to what it is. Seven times seventyi,. A wekk of years and more. Sometimes seven is infinite…...

Bottom line, God's ways are not our ways. I shy away from expert and prefer to wait instead of explaining certain aspects of god's teach and how H teaches us…..but th is just I.

I pray not to offend anyone.

I would agree. 12 is used to represent the authority of God. Adding a zero or zeros just emphasizes it. Just as adding zero or zeros to the number 144, (12X 12) like the number 144,000 to represent the whole church. There could of been 120 literal in a big house. But I don't think that is the spiritual understanding in that verse. 12 is used that way throughout the scriptures . Just as tongues of fire is used to represent those in whom have the approval of God in that parable.

 

[lastofall]

[for me anyway] I thank God the Father in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ for hiding His Truth from the wise and prudent (those that would make use of scholastic achievement in an endeavor to think and speak above that which is written), and instead reveals His Truth to the common, practical person who simply believes His Word.

 

[dcontroversal]

Some of you need to go back to the 1st century and set these confused people straight.....

King James Version
And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?

Darby Bible Translation
and how do we hear them each in our own dialect in which we have been born,

World English Bible
How do we hear, everyone in our own native language?

Young's Literal Translation
and how do we hear, each in our proper dialect, in which we were born?

King James Version
Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia,
Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes,
Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God.

 

[Lafftur]

Some of you need to go back to the 1st century and set these confused people straight.....

King James Version
And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?

Darby Bible Translation
and how do we hear them each in our own dialect in which we have been born,

World English Bible
How do we hear, everyone in our own native language?

Young's Literal Translation
and how do we hear, each in our proper dialect, in which we were born?

Thank you, dc! This helps me a lot!

 

[dcontroversal]

Thank you, dc! This helps me a lot!

The word of God tends to do that....weeds through the "dung".........................!!!!!!

 

[p_rehbein]

The number 120 comes from the 15th Verse in Chapter 1.

And in those days Peter stood up in the midst of the disciples, and said, (the number of names together were about an hundred and twenty,)

What I read, it is said the Apostles, the women who traveled with Christ, the 70 Evangelists that Christ sent out and, I think 29 believers who were from Jerusalem. Something like that.

However, this is not saying all of them were present when the Holy Spirit fell upon them.....that happened later........as I read it in researching.......This group gathered to chose a replacement for Judas........when they cast lots to chose Mattias? Right?

Anyway, those were the 120......but they were not/or may not have been present when the Holy Spirit came down