Read what Acts 2 reports that the people said they heard and compare that to other scriptures on ‘tongues’. Do they describe the same thing or not?
How about listing 3 people raised from the dead after Pentecost? You would think a ‘common’ occurrence of such importance (raising the dead) would be mentioned more than once.
I never claimed that you should not expect God to raise the dead … I claimed that two unique miracles (Lazarus and Pentecost) were “unique miracles” and not repeated in scripture as they appeared in those special events.
The Book of Acts is historical narrative. It is not meant to be prescriptive unless the text included in an event expressly says so. To make a descriptive event into something that is to be prescribed for all believers without a supporting text associated with the event, is applying the even description in a way that is not intended by the author. I don't believe in the notion that the Holy Spirit "mysteriously" applies a descriptive event to the experience of Christian believers.
When we apply this to Acts 2, we see that the Day of Pentecost description of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the group of believers, along with a sound like a mighty rushing wind, tongues of fire resting on their heads, and spontaneously speaking in tongues which were understood by all the regional Jewish visitor who heard them, we see nothing in the text that this should happen to every future group of believers. Nor does the text say that the tongues have to be languages that are understood by those who hear them.
The same goes for when Peter raised Dorcas from the dead. This is a description of how Peter was used to achieve the miracle, but there is no text to say that this should happen with every subsequent believer who encounters a person who has passed away.
Incidentally, the falling of the Holy Spirit on the 12 Ephesian disciples was also descriptive, without any evidence in the text that this is what every believer should experience. But there are some Pentecostal groups who have used this event to say that the baptism with the Spirit is a subsequent event to conversion because Paul asked them: "Have you received the Holy Spirit since you believed?" But those group have added one and one and got three, because the disciples had just the baptism of John, and the Holy Spirit fell when they were baptised in the name of Jesus.
But when people use descriptive narrative to come up with a theology for all believers without actual text that shows that the event has a prescriptive aspect for believers, they are being presumptive - adding to the text something that isn't there.
But we know that when people receive Christ, and are baptised in His name, they receive the Holy Spirit, because every event in Acts where people received Christ, they received the Holy Spirit, and Paul says in Galatians, "Did you receive the Holy Spirit according to the Law or by faith (my paraphrase from memory)? What Paul is saying is that when a person receives Christ by faith, they also receive the Holy Spirit.
Also we know that there are not two baptisms, because Paul expressly said, "One Lord, one faith, and one baptism." So there is only one baptism with the Spirit and that is when the person receives Christ and is baptised. Also, interestingly, those who received Christ were baptised immediately and not some time after. What delays baptism in our churches is a matter of organisation and setting up rather than some doctrine that says that baptism should occur at a later time.
So the upshot of what I am saying is that we need to correctly discern between what is descriptive narrative and what is meant to be prescriptive for believers. If a Scripture reference is meant to be prescriptive, then the text should make that quite clear. The example is that 1 Corinthians is prescriptive for all believers everywhere, because Paul clearly says that in the opening verses of chapter 1.
By the way, that includes chapters 12 and 14 along with the rest of the book. There is nothing in the text that says that chapters 12 and 14 apply just to a select group of believers in the First Century as some want us to believe. Just sayin...
