What happened at Pentecost?

Theo102

New member
According to Acts 2 it was the Holy Spirit that was present at Pentecost, but the prophecy of Joel doesn't match what happened there, and Peter confused the Messiah with YHWH just like Paul did in Romans and Philippians.

Acts 2
21 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever* shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.
22 Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know:
25 For David speaketh concerning him, I foresaw the Lord always* before my face, for he is on my right hand, that I should not be moved:

And it shall come to pass, [that] whosoever shall call on the name of YHWH shall be delivered: for in mount Zion and in Jerusalem shall be deliverance, as YHWH hath said, and in the remnant whom YHWH shall call.
Joel 2:32

I have set YHWH always before me: because [he is] at my right hand, I shall not be moved.
Psalms 16:8
 

Idolater

"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
What happened at Pentecost was that the One Church was born that day in Jerusalem. Acts 2:9-11 shows the very great diversity of nationalities present that day in Jerusalem. The Church from Day One was integrated, and not segregated.
 

clefty

New member
What happened at Pentecost was that the One Church was born that day in Jerusalem. Acts 2:9-11 shows the very great diversity of nationalities present that day in Jerusalem. The Church from Day One was integrated, and not segregated.

You mean it was like the mixed multitude that left Egypt which Stephen called the “church in the wilderness“ Acts 7:38 ...Stephen nor any of the apostles thought Pentecost done away with but a tradition continued from the “old”...no mention of a new tradition or it being a birthday of new church...

in fact poor Stephen was slandered by Jews who wished to stir up real trouble for him by accusing him of teaching “Jesus changed the customs Moses delivered to us”...Luke was clear these slandering Jews were FALSE WITNESSES Acts 6:13-14 as Stephen was NOT teaching Jesus changed the customs Moses delivered...to us...

IS WHY they were meeting for Pentecost...and Passover Acts 20:6 (wonder if THAT is what he was teaching those gentiles Phil 4:9) and autumn’s Day of Atonement Acts 27:9...oh yeah and also weekly Sabbaths...

So it was slandering JewIsh troublemakers which started the false witness a new church was “born“...the irony...Later lying Jews even tried to get Paul with the same charges...but couldn’t prove it...despite having letters he wrote used now to claim as you do....
 

Idolater

"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
You mean it was like the mixed multitude that left Egypt which Stephen called the “church in the wilderness“ Acts 7:38 ...Stephen nor any of the apostles thought Pentecost done away with but a tradition continued from the “old”...no mention of a new tradition or it being a birthday of new church...

in fact poor Stephen was slandered by Jews who wished to stir up real trouble for him by accusing him of teaching “Jesus changed the customs Moses delivered to us”...Luke was clear these slandering Jews were FALSE WITNESSES Acts 6:13-14 as Stephen was NOT teaching Jesus changed the customs Moses delivered...to us...

IS WHY they were meeting for Pentecost...and Passover Acts 20:6 (wonder if THAT is what he was teaching those gentiles Phil 4:9) and autumn’s Day of Atonement Acts 27:9...oh yeah and also weekly Sabbaths...

So it was slandering JewIsh troublemakers which started the false witness a new church was “born“...the irony...Later lying Jews even tried to get Paul with the same charges...but couldn’t prove it...despite having letters he wrote used now to claim as you do....
Do you know who your bishop is Clefty? Bishop is a biblical office. The supreme pastor of a region, like James the bishop of Jerusalem, or Peter the eventual bishop of Rome, Timothy of Ephesus, Titus of Crete, etc. Later on Clement bishop of Rome (successor of Peter since that's Peter's see), Ignatius bishop of Antioch (also a Petrine see), and Polycarp bishop of Smyrna. It's a long, God-made tradition.

Do you know who your bishop is?
 

clefty

New member
Do you know who your bishop is Clefty? Bishop is a biblical office. The supreme pastor of a region, like James the bishop of Jerusalem, or Peter the eventual bishop of Rome, Timothy of Ephesus, Titus of Crete, etc. Later on Clement bishop of Rome (successor of Peter since that's Peter's see), Ignatius bishop of Antioch (also a Petrine see), and Polycarp bishop of Smyrna. It's a long, God-made tradition.

Do you know who your bishop is?

Oh that’s a good one...Peter...

he appointed successors on condition and warned of false teachers...sadly his seat has been empty for a long time...

Kinda like King Saul was not succeeded for disobedience ...and Aaron was superseded for inefficiency...appointments are conditional...

Peter said we should follow Yah rather than man’s traditions...I agree with my bishop...and even the council of Jerusalem relied on and ruled from...the same scriptures Paul wrote Timothy they were sufficient to salvation and righteousness...the only scriptures at that time were the “Old” Testament...

Yup succession is so tricky who knew?...factions and schisms even today in yours...

hope your Bishop agrees with your assessment of the Pentecost party being a integrated and non segregated multicultural ecumenical...OH WAIT...they were all Jews...hmmmm...Peter too...kept kosher...and he warned of false teachers that would claim other than what he passed down...yup his seat has been empty for a long long time...wonder if my bishop would even recognize this schismatic institution...

The irony that the Law itself was not broken but the law of succession was from Aaron to Yahushua not a Levite...
 

oatmeal

Well-known member
According to Acts 2 it was the Holy Spirit that was present at Pentecost, but the prophecy of Joel doesn't match what happened there, and Peter confused the Messiah with YHWH just like Paul did in Romans and Philippians.

Acts 2
21 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever* shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.
22 Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know:
25 For David speaketh concerning him, I foresaw the Lord always* before my face, for he is on my right hand, that I should not be moved:

And it shall come to pass, [that] whosoever shall call on the name of YHWH shall be delivered: for in mount Zion and in Jerusalem shall be deliverance, as YHWH hath said, and in the remnant whom YHWH shall call.
Joel 2:32

I have set YHWH always before me: because [he is] at my right hand, I shall not be moved.
Psalms 16:8

The passage from Joel referred to in the context that Peter used it must be understood as a comparison, not as a literal fulfillment of prophecy.

Peter is using that passage as a metaphor to make s strong comparison not s literal equivalent
 

Theo102

New member
The passage from Joel referred to in the context that Peter used it must be understood as a comparison, not as a literal fulfillment of prophecy.
Why?

"But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel" reads like Peter was saying that it was a fulfilment of prophecy.
 

oatmeal

Well-known member
Why?

"But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel" reads like Peter was saying that it was a fulfilment of prophecy.

Good question.

A question that I sought the answer for as well

As you pointed out, there are huge differences between Joel's prophecy and the actual events on Pentecost.

Without enumerating them, suffice it to say, that should be enough for us to conclude that Peter was making a figurative comparison not a literal one

He was dealing with the accusation that the apostles were drunk on drinking new wine..

Peter simply pointed out that what they witnessed was as serious as what Joel described

The reason I conclude that is a metaphor not a similar or hypocatastasis is the use of the word is to make the comparison. One is or is represented by another.

A stronger case may be made if it is also an ellipsis with the word like or like that missing. The events on Pentecost were like those described in Joel.

There is an abundance of figures of speech used in scripture but they are not all obvious
 

clefty

New member
Why?

"But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel" reads like Peter was saying that it was a fulfilment of prophecy.

Isaiah 43:10“You are My witnesses,” declares the LORD, “and My servant whom I have chosen, so that you may consider and believe Me and understand that I am He. Before Me, no god was formed, and after Me none will come. 11I, yes I, am the LORD, and there is no Savior but Me. 12I alone decreed and saved and proclaimed—I, and not some foreign god among you. So you are My witnesses,” declares the LORD, “that I am God.…


Perhaps our view now of the Father and the Son has Them further apart than believers at that time?...

Peter merely fully conflates the Son with the Father and calling YAHushua IS calling His name. “You have seen me you have seen the Father...He and I ARE ONE”.....most there that day had heard Him say that very thing themselves...Thomas’ “behold my Lord and my God”

Torah often has an angel/messenger sent by Him as referred to Yah Himself...

Here is more of that conflation:

Psalm 35:9
Then my soul will rejoice in the LORD and exult in His salvation.

Habakkuk 3:18
yet I will exult in the LORD; I will rejoice in the God of my salvation!

1 Timothy 1:1
Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the command of God our Savior and of Christ Jesus our hope,

1 Timothy 2:3
This is good and pleasing in the sight of God our Savior,

Titus 1:3
In His own time, He has revealed His message in the proclamation entrusted to me by the command of God our Savior.

Titus 2:10
not stealing from them, but showing all good faith, so that in every respect they will adorn the teaching about God our Savior.

Titus 3:4
But when the kindness of God our Savior and His love for mankind appeared,

Jude 1:25
to the only God our Savior be glory, majesty, dominion, and authority, through Jesus Christ our Lord, before all time, and now, and for all eternity.

But yes much quoted in the NT from the OT has been “poetically licensed” at risk to distraction...to both the message and reader...
 

Right Divider

Body part
What happened at Pentecost was that the One Church was born that day in Jerusalem. Acts 2:9-11 shows the very great diversity of nationalities present that day in Jerusalem. The Church from Day One was integrated, and not segregated.

:dizzy:

No, the "One Church" is a figment of your vivid imagination. The church which is His body came later. Pentecost was all about Israel and their prophecy. Gentiles had always been invited to join with Israel.
 

Right Divider

Body part
The passage from Joel referred to in the context that Peter used it must be understood as a comparison, not as a literal fulfillment of prophecy.

Peter is using that passage as a metaphor to make s strong comparison not s literal equivalent

:juggle:

No, Peter was not "making a metaphor", nor was it a "literal equivalent".

Peter was declaring that prophecy was being fulfilled, literally.
 

Idolater

"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
Oh that’s a good one...Peter...
Hmph. My bishop's Cardinal O'Malley.
he appointed successors on condition and warned of false teachers...sadly his seat has been empty for a long time...
Or, it is occupied by his 265th successor.
Kinda like King Saul was not succeeded for disobedience ...and Aaron was superseded for inefficiency...appointments are conditional...
You continue to apply Old Covenant thinking to the New Covenant. Par for the course for you.
Peter said we should follow Yah rather than man’s traditions...
That's Catholic.
I agree with my bishop...and even the council of Jerusalem relied on and ruled from...the same scriptures Paul wrote Timothy they were sufficient to salvation and righteousness...the only scriptures at that time were the “Old” Testament...
The Apostles themselves were the source of authority to the Church, their authority was the Lord's own authority.

Off topic but I'll ask since I'm thinking about it: Do you Clefty believe in the Trinity?
Yup succession is so tricky who knew?...factions and schisms even today in yours...
There were factions and schisms in the Apostolic era. Who knew?
hope your Bishop agrees with your assessment of the Pentecost party being a integrated and non segregated multicultural ecumenical...OH WAIT...they were all Jews...
Being PENTECOST and all (a Jewish holy day). Plus, there were converts.
hmmmm...Peter too...kept kosher...
When around Jews. And for which he was lambasted by Paul.
and he warned of false teachers that would claim other than what he passed down...
Again, this is Catholic.
yup his seat has been empty for a long long time...
Again according to you.

At least you acknowledge that he has a seat.
wonder if my bishop would even recognize this schismatic institution...
I'm sure Peter's observing the situation intently.
The irony that the Law itself was not broken but the law of succession was from Aaron to Yahushua not a Levite...
According to the scriptures, yes. The order of Melchizedek. New Covenant. As in brand new.
 

clefty

New member
Hmph. My bishop's Cardinal O'Malley.
good to know...
Or, it is occupied by his 265th successor.
succession is conditional...some claim only now conditions were not met and thus the seat is empty...only since 1960s...I cast my scope a bit longer into the past...
You continue to apply Old Covenant thinking to the New Covenant. Par for the course for you.
as my Bishop taught...thanks...consistency is key but not in yours...
That's Catholic.
following Yah Him His way is? your fruits testify otherwise...except maybe that first century...certainly that Pentecost on His calendar...not Rome's ya dig?
The Apostles themselves were the source of authority to the Church, their authority was the Lord's own authority.
do you even recall what Yahushua responded with when challenged "WHO IS YOUR BISHOP?" as you do here by your ilk the Pharisees?

Off topic but I'll ask since I'm thinking about it: Do you Clefty believe in the Trinity?
I follow the progression is from Father to Son the Spirit is the Father's...


There were factions and schisms in the Apostolic era. Who knew?
you didn't...like to claim it's been only ONE...
Being PENTECOST and all (a Jewish holy day). Plus, there were converts.
earlier you claim Peter was catholic and now its back to Jews...and Pentecost is sill celebrated by Israel...including those grafted into Israel...as it was in the OT when the ekklesia was in the wilderness...NOT grafted into your institution which does NOT celebrate the other festivals...something about not tradition or something

When around Jews. And for which he was lambasted by Paul.
is that what your bishop taught you?
Again, this is Catholic.
and still false teachers devoured the flock...emptied the seat by default...as teaching heresies disposes you your office...thanks

Again according to you.
nope your ekklesia law does...which happens to agree with prior scripture...as what was consulted in Jerusalem in Acts 15.

At least you acknowledge that he has a seat.
had...He is asleep now...dead don't need seats or bosoms of Abraham...

I'm sure Peter's observing the situation intently.
if he is not dead he will wish to be when he sees what yours has done to his

Look at this mess:

https://youtu.be/QnvuEOYSt-g

what better way to RIP WASP America

14 billion from China to spread Marxism...is Marx your archbishop too?




According to the scriptures, yes. The order of Melchizedek. New Covenant. As in brand new.
same Law...please re read...I will place My Law...NOT my New Law...or My Son's higher Law and certainly NOT your bishop O'malleys…

If you Love Him...keep His commandments...the way He did...His Father's IMMUTABLE Will...not follow after those that would boldly and boastfully change both TIMES and Law...to compromise with perverted masses...
 

Idolater

"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
Your "holy roman empire church" is NOT from God.
You can call her whatever you want, but it's undisputed among PhD historians that the Catholic Church is the movement /organization /etc. that began in Judea in AD 33. Everything else, including your own preferred spin /tradition, is a splinter group, and derivative /denominational of the original.
 

Theo102

New member
You can call her whatever you want, but it's undisputed among PhD historians that the Catholic Church is the movement /organization /etc. that began in Judea in AD 33.

The Catholic doctrine that the Father and the Son are of the same substance is related to Peter and Paul's conflation of the Father with the Son. Peter's conflation is from Pentecost (ref from OP), Paul's is from Romans 14 and Philippians 2:10 (cf Isaiah 45:21;23). This is central to the Arian controversy.
 
Top