I showed you where it said they went to the Temple. Only problem was translators said 'house'. And that 'leads' you to think that you are still back in chapter 1 when they really were in a house where they were living.
This is precisely what you said:
I don't think that the disciples spoke in tongues in the 'upper room', where they, devoid of the Spirit, had to "cast lots" to pick an apostle to replace Judas. I think that they spoke in tongues after the 'upper room' as they were celebrating "when the day of Pentecost had FULLY come". And where would Jews, coming from everywhere, have celebrated that feast? I believe they would have done 'that' in the "house/oikos" of the Lord...or the Temple.
ACT 2:2 And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house/oikos where they were sitting.
MAT 12:4 How he entered into the house/oikos of God, and did eat the shewbread,
Please notice: the word "house" in Greek, is "oikos."
The same word is used many other places in the New Testament, to refer to common houses. Here is a very small sampling of verses that use "oikos" to speak of common homes:
Mark 7:17
Mark 7:24
Mark 8:26
Mark 9:28
Now, for your assertion to hold any water at all, "oikos" would have to mean NOT a common abode, but ONLY the House of God, aka the Temple. But I have shown you that is not so.
Therefore, the Word does not say at all, that they had moved from the upper room into the Temple.
Just not in there, sir.
I never said, and neither does scripture imply, that they did stay at the Temple all day. And what would have been even more impossible situation, IMO, is that they were "staying"/living in a house on some side street of Jerusalem where the Holy Spirit secretly blew into town and then they made so much noise in their little 'upper room' that a couple of thousand people all showed up, representing multiple nations to hear Peter, immediately preach. What better 'house/oikos' for Pentecost to be fulfilled in, than the house of God?
Well, yes it is only your opinion.
Jesus said to the woman at the well, in John 4:21, that it's no longer about the place, but about the heart.
Worship can happen anywhere, under the New Covenant. The Old Covenant stood in externals, such as the place where God had chosen for sacrifices to happen. But the New is about worship from the heart,
anywhere.
Of course the Holy Spirit landed in an unnamed house! That's what the New Testament is all about!
That isn't logical. If they were "calmly' speaking in foreign languages", then why wouldn't the locals just assume they were some of the many foreign Jews there for the feast?
Which is precisely my point. I don't think you are following me very well.
... Of course I don't accuse foreigners of being drunk...not even when I was doing jail ministry every Tuesday night and the Mexicans would close in prayer speaking in Spanish, which I know 'nary a word'....OK...maybe a few words.
Not much difference between "
drunk" and "
mad" when it comes to "
ungifted" '
non Charismatic Christians' or '
heathen unbelievers' when it comes to judging supernatural things as '
drunkeness', or even '
madness' IMO.
1 Corinthians 14:23 Therefore if the whole church assembles together and all speak in tongues, and ungifted men or unbelievers enter, will they not say that you are mad?
As you may have heard me say before, that word "ungifted" in this verse is also translated in other versions as "unlearned, outsiders and some who don't understand"....IOW a non Charismatic/Pentecostal Christian. And they are differentiated in this verse by the term "unbelievers/apistos" or 'those without faith'.
The 120 who received the Holy Ghost were acting like drunk men, aside from what they were saying in foreign languages. That's my point.
And yes, I agree, 1 Corinthians 14:23 is talking about generally the same thing. Those who hear tongues will have a choice: either believe or mock.
Most anti-Pentecostals say the only reason the believers were accused of being drunk was because they spoke in foreign languages. But that's an illogical position. No one accuses a sober-acting person speaking a foreign language, of being drunk.
Picture this: someone is not acting drunk, and is accused of being drunk. What's their natural defense? What would make you think I'm drunk? I'm not acting drunk, am I?"
But Peter's defense to the accusation was
not "but we aren't
acting drunk!"
Because they
were acting drunk.
When the Holy Ghost falls upon someone heavily, it can cause you to feel positively drunk. I have been accused more than once of acting drunk while under the heavy influence of the Holy Ghost. I have lurched, staggered, shouted, leaned like Barney Fife on Sheriff Andy Taylor's shoulder and giggled to my friend. I have slid down in my seat and gotten rumpled and didn't even care.
Because the new wine of the Holy Ghost is far better than anything this world can offer.
