Speaking in Tongues a Cessationists’ View

[Saint Steven]

That is simply incorrect brother.

Acts 2:1...………...
"And when the day of Pentecost was now come, they were all together in one place".

Verse 2...………….
"Suddenly a sound like the blowing of a violent wind came from heaven and filled the whole house where they were sitting.

Verse 3..............
"They saw what seemed to be tongues of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them.

Verse 4.............
"All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them."

Where in those verse do we find that there were OTHERS or ANYONE beside the Apostles present? YOU are reading INTO the Scriptures what YOU want them to say.

Now proper Bible study and exegesis demands that in this meeting we have the words, "they," and "them" used. In the Greek, when a pronoun is used we must take a look at the preceding noun. The preceding noun is found in Acts 1:26 and it is "apostles." So, the "they," and the "them," has reference to the apostles which is named in Acts 1"26 and the pronouns follow in Acts 2:1-4, "they," and "them."

That means there was NO ONE ELSE THERE my brother!!!!!

I see you are late to the party. And already making outlandish and uninformed claims. Not to mention horrendous spelling errors. I'll try to be patient with you. But I have no intention of catching you up on 26 pages of posts.

We are talking about those who were water baptized and received the promise in this scripture. After Peter's sermon.

Acts 2:38-39
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.
39 The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off—for all whom the Lord our God will call.”

 

[Anto9us]

Act 1:14
These all continued with one accord in prayer and supplication, with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brethren.
Act 1:15
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,)

 

[Major1]

Where does your ever-widening circle stop?

You claim that the charismatic gifts only came by way of the two outpourings, or the Apostles' hands. There was a third outpouring, but let's ignore that for now. (Acts 4:31)

Who are the Apostles?
- There were the Twelve of course. (Judas out, Matthias in Acts 1:24-26)
These were the 12 Apostles. (capital "A")
- The Apostle Paul is then added as an apostle. (small "a")
Is that where we draw the line on apostles?
This creates the possibility for apostles to be added beyond the original twelve.

- What about Apollos? ​

- And Barnabas? (also called an apostle)

Then we see Ananias, the elders at Timothy's church, and finally
Timothy distributing gifts by the laying on of hands.

Where does it end? It doesn't.
There is no way to contain apostleship and the
Holy Spirit gift-giving by the laying on of hands.

I can not agree with you Steve. I realize what you are wanting to believe but the Scriptures do not allow for the existance of Apostles today.

Simply.....NO ONE can qualify as an apostle today so the argument is mute.

#1.
Scripturally speaking, we find that the apostles were all personally chosen by the Lord Jesus.
Mt.10:1-4 and in Lk.6:12-16 names the 12 apostles, one of which was chosen for perdition. The 70 as well as the twelve were also trained and sent out.
The position of the apostles were not permanently fixed number until after the resurrection (Matt. 19:28-30; Lk. 22:28-34; Jn. 21:15-18). The number 12 then becomes an eternally established number.

#2.
They also were to have seen the risen Lord be witnesses of his resurrection.
When the closed group of twelve became eleven, they sought another to take Judas' office: Acts 1:21-22 “Therefore, of these men who have accompanied us all the time the Lord Jesus went in and among us beginning from the baptism of John to that day he was taken up from us One of these must become a witness with us of his resurrection.'

Paul's own words in defense of his apostleship claim in 1 Cor. 9:1: “Am I not an apostle? ... Have I not seen Jesus Christ our lord?

In 1 Cor. 15 Paul describes the gospel and concentrates on the resurrection and the sequence of his appearing during the 40 day period after the resurrection.Vs.5 “And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve: then by over 500.” Vs.7...…………. “Then he was seen by James then by all the apostles.”

#3.
An apostle must have been taught divine truth by Jesus personally (Galatians1:1,12; 1Corinthians15:3).

Acts 2:43:...….
“Then fear came upon every soul and many signs and wonders are done through the apostles. Acts 5:12 “And through he hands of the apostles many signs and wonders were done among the people.

Acts 14:3...…
” Paul and Barnabas speak boldly in the Lord, who bears witness to His word of grace, granting signs sign and wonders to be done through their hands.”

All these and many more scriptures show that the apostles were special men commissioned for a unique role in a particular time period for the Church and because those qualification can not be met today, it is impossible to have apostles today.

It really is just that simple.

 

[Saint Steven]

Then our discussion is over. There is no way to break the impasse or reach any accord if one side insists that what happened really did not happen...BUT for no reason or with no explanation.

Even people who insist that Lee Harvey Oswald did not shoot JFK or that terrorists were not the people who brought down the Twin Towers offer some contrary theory or scenario.

That's not so with many of todays continuationists!

When some small church groups were moved to reintroduce tongues into the spectrum of Christian denominations only a couple hundred years ago, they--the forerunners of todays Pentecostals--were acknowledging that tongues had ceased but should be started up again (or God wanted them to be in evidence again because the last days had supposedly arrived or something else like that).

But today, many of their successors want to say that tongues never had ceased and just stand on that statement..

What about Charles Finney? (article and source link below)

Charles Finney (1792–1875) -
Shortly after Finney’s conversion in 1821, he was waiting on the Lord
asking for spiritual enablement when he was mightily moved upon by the Lord.
In his Autobiography, Finney refers to this experience as the “Baptism in the Holy Spirit” and described the occasion as follows: “I wept aloud with joy and love …
and literally bellowed out the unutterable gushings of my soul.”

Finney could have easily described the remarkable intensity of his
unique experience in the words of Paul in Romans 8:26-27: “But the Holy Spirit prays
for us with groanings that cannot be expressed in words. And the Father who knows all
hearts knows what the Spirit is saying, for the Spirit pleads for us believers
in harmony with God’s own will” (NLT43). Paul is probably referring to the
believer’s experiences of praying in ecstatic utterances (“tongues”),
motivated by the Holy Spirit.

Finney’s experience was so intense that he reported he was constrained to
ask the Lord to let up a little. But the experience of that anointing was the impetus
for Finney’s powerfully successful revivals. Britannica’s biographical sketch of Finney says:
“He fomented spirited revivals in the villages of upstate New York. … His revivals [also]
achieved spectacular success in large cities, and in 1832 he began an almost continuous
revival in New York City … [which] led his supporters to build …
the Broadway Tabernacle [for him] in 1834.” Source

 

[Anto9us]

Act 2:1
And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place.

Well, most people assume that this THEY is the 120 people referred to earlier - this includes the eleven, plus the newly-appointed Matthias who took Judas Iscariot's place -- it includes Mother Mary and the other women...

What do we picture? 120 people speaking in the languages of all the visiting Jews from other places - and Peter preaching to them all -- there were at least 3000 listening to him for that is how many were added to the church that day.

I don't know what the fuss is about whether the hearers just HEARD THINGS in their own languages or the 120 actually SPOKE in those languages (6 in one hand, half a dozen in the other)

We have 120 people acting in a way that at least 3000 others thought they were drunk.

We have the Virgin Mary speaking in Tongues like all the rest of them.

Act 1:13
And when they were come in, they went up into an upper room, where abode both Peter, and James, and John, and Andrew, Philip, and Thomas, Bartholomew, and Matthew, James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon Zelotes, and Judas the brother of James.
Act 1:14
These all continued with one accord in prayer and supplication, with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brethren.
Act 1:15
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,)

Are these 120 people still in that Upper Room where Matthias was appointed when Peter is preaching later to at least 3000 people, telling them, no, we are not drunk, but this was prophesied by Joel?

 

[Anto9us]

An "Upper Room" that has space for 3,120 people seems unlikely.

Act 2:2
And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting.

So the 120 are in a house?

 

[Major1]

Act 1:14
These all continued with one accord in prayer and supplication, with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brethren.
Act 1:15
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,)

Since you do not direct you thoughts to any one person, we do not know who is to respond, however......what is your point in the verses you listed??????

The question was WHEN did the holy Spirit come and WHO was there do be filled?

NOTHING In the two verse you posted speak to that question.

Acts 2:1 is on a different day. Notice the actual words in verse 1...…….
"And the DAY of Pentecost was fully come...……."!

There is nothing in the Scriptures that say the 120 was filled with the Holy Spirit on that same day as the apostles chose Matthias.!

THEM and THEY were the Apostles.

 

[Anto9us]

Act 2:4
And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.
----
So the disciples did indeed SPEAK in other tongues (they were not simply HEARD in those tongues, they spoke them)
----

Act 2:5
And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven.
Act 2:6
Now when this was noised abroad,

φωνή phōnḗ, fo-nay'; probably akin to G5316 through the idea of disclosure; a tone (articulate, bestial or artificial); by implication, an address (for any purpose), saying or language:—noise, sound, voice.


the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language.

Act 2:7
And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans?
Act 2:8
And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?


Marvel not, O visitors to Jerusalem -- with 120 people speaking in tongues -- I guess they covered between them all, all the languages of the visitors.

 

[Saint Steven]

I can not agree with you Steve. I realize what you are wanting to believe but the Scriptures do not allow for the existance of Apostles today. …

You have a lot explaining to do then.

- The apostle Paul was not one of the original twelve.
Yet he was giving spiritual gifts through the laying on of hands.

- Ananias was not an apostle, yet he ministered the gifts to the apostle Paul.

- What about Barnabas? Called an apostle in scripture.

- Apollos?

- The elders at Timothy's church gave him gifts with the laying on of hands.

- And Timothy himself.

Where does it stop?

 

[swordsman1]

Act 2:4
And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.
----
So the disciples did indeed SPEAK in other tongues (they were not simply HEARD in those tongues, they spoke them)
----

Agreed. The disciples miraculously spoke in known foreign languages. Acts 2:4-11 is the only description of tongues in scripture. Nowhere is it described as a non-human language.

 

[Anto9us]

I did not say, Major1, that the choosing of Matthias and the day of Pentecost were the same day.

I am trying to nail down the antecedent of THEY to the only time a number of people and who they were is specified.

You seem to limit things to 12 apostles.

I would rather suggest that from this 120 people which included James the brother of the Lord and Mary His mother -- some or all of them were the ones speaking in other languages to the visitors to Jerusalem.

A (the negating alpha) Methousia (sober)
Not sober
drunk

this is how the apostles/followers/disciples/brothers and sisters seemed to the onlookers

 

[Anto9us]

If I , a Parthian, simply hear you, a Galilean, speaking in my own language -- that in and of itself would not make me consider you to be amethousia

I feel the tongue-talkers were in some state of ecstasy, some other behavior was going on other than their mere speaking of these languages

 

[Major1]

Act 2:1
And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place.

Well, most people assume that this THEY is the 120 people referred to earlier - this includes the eleven, plus the newly-appointed Matthias who took Judas Iscariot's place -- it includes Mother Mary and the other women...

What do we picture? 120 people speaking in the languages of all the visiting Jews from other places - and Peter preaching to them all -- there were at least 3000 listening to him for that is how many were added to the church that day.

I don't know what the fuss is about whether the hearers just HEARD THINGS in their own languages or the 120 actually SPOKE in those languages (6 in one hand, half a dozen in the other)

We have 120 people acting in a way that at least 3000 others thought they were drunk.

We have the Virgin Mary speaking in Tongues like all the rest of them.

Act 1:13
And when they were come in, they went up into an upper room, where abode both Peter, and James, and John, and Andrew, Philip, and Thomas, Bartholomew, and Matthew, James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon Zelotes, and Judas the brother of James.
Act 1:14
These all continued with one accord in prayer and supplication, with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brethren.
Act 1:15
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,)

Are these 120 people still in that Upper Room where Matthias was appointed when Peter is preaching later to at least 3000 people, telling them, no, we are not drunk, but this was prophesied by Joel?

ASSUMPTION! I am not seeking to be argumentative. I am only pointing out that an assumption can not be used to establish a Bible doctrine.

I am well aware of the assumption and I was taught that very same thing as well. But look at the actual Bible words.

Acts 1:26...…..
"Then they cast lots, and the lot fell to Matthias; so he was added to the eleven apostles."

Now up to that verse, is there an appearance or filling of the Holy Spirit? NO!
Verse 14...….
"They all joined together constantly in prayer, along with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brothers."

Then Acts 2:1...……
"And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place".

Has the Holy Spirit come YET????? NO!
Does the Bible say that 120 are there in verse 1? NO!
Does the Bible even say that verse #1 is on the same day as Acts 1:26? NO!

Acts 2:2...……
"And suddenly there came a sound from heaven...…" THERE HE IS!!!!!

It could very well be the 120 still in the upper room on the same day that Mathias was selected. What we actually see is THEM AND THEY. All I am saying is that it is an "Assumption" to say that they are and ASSUMPTION is a dangerous thing to base a Bible doctrine on.

 

[Major1]

You have a lot explaining to do then.

- The apostle Paul was not one of the original twelve.
Yet he was giving spiritual gifts through the laying on of hands.

- Ananias was not an apostle, yet he ministered the gifts to the apostle Paul.

- What about Barnabas? Called an apostle in scripture.

- Apollos?

- The elders at Timothy's church gave him gifts with the laying on of hands.

- And Timothy himself.

Where does it stop?

NOPE.
I already did that for you. You can accept or reject what I posted about apostles. Makes no difference to me as I am not going to

 

[swordsman1]

If I , a Parthian, simply hear you, a Galilean, speaking in my own language -- that in and of itself would not make me consider you to be amethousia

I feel the tongue-talkers were in some state of ecstasy, some other behavior was going on other than their mere speaking of these languages

It would if they were in the temple courts (where the foreigners were gathered) and the only expected language was the language of the Temple (Hebrew). The people who thought they were drunk were the locals (Acts 2:14) who may well have known the disciples, and so would never have expected them to be speaking in a strange language. So they assumed they were drunk.

 

[Anto9us]

Act 2:9
Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia,
Act 2:10
Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes,
Act 2:11
Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God.

I identify FIFTEEN REGIONS -- supposedly these represent areas that had their own language -- that is more tan 12 -- there is no grounds for limiting anything here to THE TWELVE DISCIPLES/apostles

I submit that more than 'the twelve' did the speaking in tongues; either that or some disciple had to "double up" and speak in Parthian as well as Median, for instance.

It is very important to look closely at exactly what happenned at Pentecost, even though I emphatically insist that THIS IS NOT THE ONLY KIND OF TONGUES THAT HAPPENNED IN THE BIBLE, it is often the only occurence that Cessationists say happenned in the Bible.

 

[Anto9us]

Co 14:2
For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.

Here we have a reference to speaking in tongues which is not at all what we had at Pentecost -- at Pentecost MEN were spoken to - here Paul describes what many of us call 'prayer language'; it is TO GOD -- it is not to Parthians, Medes, Cretans, Pamphylians, et al -- it is to God.

 

[swordsman1]

Co 14:2
For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.

Here we have a reference to speaking in tongues which is not at all what we had at Pentecost -- at Pentecost MEN were spoken to - here Paul describes what many of us call 'prayer language'; it is TO GOD -- it is not to Parthians, Medes, Cretans, Pamphylians, et al -- it is to God.

I've already posted this once today...

The first 3 rules of biblical interpretation are:
1. Context
2. Context
3. Context

The context of the whole of chapter 14 is Paul addressing the problem of the Corinthians speaking an unrecognized tongue in church meetings. The "no one" is not referring to no one on the face of the earth, but to no one in the meeting. So v2 should be read "For one who speaks in an [unrecognized] tongue does not speak to men but to God; for no one [in the congregation] understands." That doesn't mean it was a non-human language. If someone was speaking say Persian in a small Greek house-church then it is no surprise that no one understands him. Only God, who understands all languages, knows what was spoken.

BTW the word 'unknown' is not in the original Greek. The KJV translators added this in an attempt to make it clear that it was an unrecognized language.

 

[redleghunter]

While I fully agree that tongues along with interpretation is required when there are meetings where the public are invited to attend. And teaching meetings need normal language teaching, because if someone got up and tried to teach them with tongues, the people wouldn't get anything out of it.

But in a worship or prayer meeting where the public don't usually attend, then there is nothing to stop people praying out loud in tongues. There is no teaching involved and the worship and prayer is directed to God and not to each other (unless in some groups verbal prayers are used to manipulate people - usually said by people who are not recognised enough to be able to give teaching in the teaching meetings, so they try doing their teaching through the "back door" by doing in the guise of prayer in prayer meetings. But that is stopped when everyone prays in tongues for most of the time in a prayer meeting).

I think that if those who are offended by people praying in tongues out loud, then they should stay away from prayer meetings where that takes place, and concentrate on attending teaching or evangelistic meetings where ministry is mainly in natural language.

But having said that, cessationists don't usually attend Pentecostal or Charismatic prayer meetings, so whether people pray out loud or not is not an issue for those who do attend, and so they just concentrate on having a good time with the Lord.

I do see Paul address outsiders later in 1 Corinthians 14, however starting with verse 5 he is clearly showing the required order for the edification of the church. Not outsiders or general public. Which again leads me to the conclusion, chapter 14 is showing there are some who speak and pray in tongues and there are some who don't---thus requiring an interpreter for the edification of the church.

 

[Major1]

I did not say, Major1, that the choosing of Matthias and the day of Pentecost were the same day.

I am trying to nail down the antecedent of THEY to the only time a number of people and who they were is specified.

You seem to limit things to 12 apostles.

I would rather suggest that from this 120 people which included James the brother of the Lord and Mary His mother -- some or all of them were the ones speaking in other languages to the visitors to Jerusalem.

A (the negating alpha) Methousia (sober)
Not sober
drunk

this is how the apostles/followers/disciples/brothers and sisters seemed to the onlookers

I understand and the closest "antecedent" of THEY AND THEM is the noun/word "APOSTLES" in verse 1:26...………
"And THEY gave forth THEIR lots and the lot fell on Matthias and he was numbered with the ELEVEN APOSTLES".

I am not limiting the apostles to 12. However the Bible does exactly that.

It is and has been taught that the number TWELVE is a divine number and represents government and authority.. But, in analyzing the number 12, the 12 heads of Israel formed the core/foundation of physical Israel and the 12 apostles formed the core/foundation of spiritual Israel.

As I have stated, there seems a break in the context with Acts 2:1 as the record moves to the Jewish festival of Pentecost. The out-pouring of holy Pneuma as Jesus promised is described. Those who receive this spirit began to speak in foreign languages.

The account states that reverent Jews from every nation heard these spirit-inspired languages. They responded: "They were amazed and astonished and began to say: Look! are not all these speaking Galileans? (Acts 2:7)

So, all those who spoke in these foreign languages were known to all be Galileans. It is well known the eleven apostles were such, and we may assume that Matthias was also Galilean.

Now noticeActs 2:14-15...…..
"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 (Greek - 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.

There is no mention of any women at all as was seen in 1:14.