[quote author=QT_PA_2T link=topic=8455.msg107326#msg107326 date=1256702725] Hi
On the day of the Pentecost, did the tongues of fire fall on the heads of the women present?
Thanks
in Luke 1: 12 Then they returned to Jerusalem from the mount called Olivet, which is near Jerusalem, a Sabbath day's journey. 13 And when they had entered, they went up into the upper room where they were staying: Peter, James, ... with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with His brothers.
Then in the beginning of next chapter: 1 When the Day of Pentecost had fully come, they were all with one accord* in one place. 2 And suddenly there came a sound from heaven, as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled the whole house where they were sitting. 3 Then there appeared to them divided tongues, as of fire, and one sat upon each of them. 4 And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.
the women, including Virgin Mary herself, were there with them in the upper room. that's the reason i included the part from the first chapter. in the second chapter, it said that the Spirit came upon "each of them."
[quote author=QT_PA_2T link=topic=8455.msg107328#msg107328 date=1256704611] In that case, if it did fall on the women's heads, did they also speak in other languages like the apostles?
I just thought that the reason why we do not allow women priests is that the tongues of fire did not descend on them.
thinking that way is wrong. the dwelling of the Spirit was the beginning of the Spirit that comes upon us ALL when we are baptized.
1 Tim 2:12 "But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence." This is where the teaching that women cannot become priests comes from. If you can read Iconography properly you will see that yes indeed Our Holy Mother St. Mary has tounges of fire, usually represented as a flame above the head.
[quote author=Ioannes link=topic=8455.msg107333#msg107333 date=1256708545] 1 Tim 2:12 "But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence." This is where the teaching that women cannot become priests comes from. If you can read Iconography properly you will see that yes indeed Our Holy Mother St. Mary has tounges of fire, usually represented as a flame above the head.
It was actually thanks to such an icon of the pentecost that I asked this question. I came across it at st takla . Org website whilst looking for hymns on the pentecost.
So, what u r saying is that although they received the tongues of fire , they did not receive the gift of speaking in tongues that was given to go and preach the gospel?
The gift of tongues was a miraculous sign, but I don't think it is the same as the ministry of evangelism. I believe that all of those present were inspired to give praise to God, both male and female. It was a powerful witness to the universality of the Gospel.
The crowd gathered because they could hear all the noise in the house, and then I understand that St Peter and the Apostles came out and spoke to the crowd.
Thanks for your answer. Yes, it makes sense. I did associate the tongue of fire with the gifts that it brought to evangelise. I guess i should not have done that.
So, how do we know that they didnt speak in other languages also?? You mean to say that it was only the 12 apostles who spoke in tongues/languages?
Also, just a side question: St Mark and St Luke were not apostles. This is extremely disappointing - but were they also able to speak in tongues? Saint Mark obviously managed get by speaking a bit of Greek with Coptic to have evangelised all of Egypt; but I guess that must have been from his education, rather than a gift of the Holy Spirit. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
I think that St Luke and St Mark were certainly Apostles. There were the 12 Apostles, and then the Seventy Apostles, and then St Paul was an Apostle, and the gift of Apostleship is given to the Church as a continuing grace and ministry. In one sense it is found in our Bishops and their role as guarantors of the Apostolic deposit. The early Church writers explicitly state that the Bishops are the successors of the Apostles, and this means more than just the 12.
The bishops are our Apostles, or are in fact Apostles.
Bishop Markos is a good example of a bishop also being engaged in a Church Planting ministry where his Apostolic grace is clearly manifest. But each bishop has the service of 'building up' the Church which is under his care.
I think that we must understand the manifestation at Pentecost as being different from the Gift of Tongues. This manifestation at Pentecost was the reversal of Babel. Where the tongues of men had once been confused by God because of their pride, now God is uniting all men, and women, in the praise of God. I am sure that the women were also praising God and were all heard out of the windows of the Upper Room where they were meeting. But I believe that probably it was some of the Apostles who went downstairs and outside to address the crowd.
The gift of tongues as we understand it from the NT is not the hearing of your own language from the mouth of someone who does not know it - as happened at Pentecost. Rather within the worship of the Church it was an outpouring of praise in a language that was unknown, followed by an interpretation. I don't believe this had or has anything to do with using language in evangelism.
St Mark knew Greek, and this would have got him by in Egypt. He might have learned some Coptic. But I imagine that his mission was directed at the Greek speaking folk around Alexandria.
As I said, the tongues of fire fell on the men AND the women. And I am sure that the men and women, both Apostles and believers, praised God in this miraculous way. It was the commotion which drew the crowd. But I do think that it was just a few of the Apostles, led by St Peter, who went outside to explain what was happening. It was not all going on in the street.
[quote author=peterfarrington link=topic=8455.msg107385#msg107385 date=1256817675] Hi QT
I think that St Luke and St Mark were certainly Apostles. There were the 12 Apostles, and then the Seventy Apostles, and then St Paul was an Apostle, and the gift of Apostleship is given to the Church as a continuing grace and ministry. In one sense it is found in our Bishops and their role as guarantors of the Apostolic deposit. The early Church writers explicitly state that the Bishops are the successors of the Apostles, and this means more than just the 12.
The bishops are our Apostles, or are in fact Apostles.
Bishop Markos is a good example of a bishop also being engaged in a Church Planting ministry where his Apostolic grace is clearly manifest. But each bishop has the service of 'building up' the Church which is under his care.
I think that we must understand the manifestation at Pentecost as being different from the Gift of Tongues. This manifestation at Pentecost was the reversal of Babel. Where the tongues of men had once been confused by God because of their pride, now God is uniting all men, and women, in the praise of God. I am sure that the women were also praising God and were all heard out of the windows of the Upper Room where they were meeting. But I believe that probably it was some of the Apostles who went downstairs and outside to address the crowd.
The gift of tongues as we understand it from the NT is not the hearing of your own language from the mouth of someone who does not know it - as happened at Pentecost. Rather within the worship of the Church it was an outpouring of praise in a language that was unknown, followed by an interpretation. I don't believe this had or has anything to do with using language in evangelism.
St Mark knew Greek, and this would have got him by in Egypt. He might have learned some Coptic. But I imagine that his mission was directed at the Greek speaking folk around Alexandria.
As I said, the tongues of fire fell on the men AND the women. And I am sure that the men and women, both Apostles and believers, praised God in this miraculous way. It was the commotion which drew the crowd. But I do think that it was just a few of the Apostles, led by St Peter, who went outside to explain what was happening. It was not all going on in the street.
God bless
Father Peter
lol...
hahahaha
Thank God for that (if its true)!!! Because, I was told that St Mark was not one of the 12.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isnt an Apostle one of the 12 apostles. St Mark was a disciple?
He was not one of the 12,
I just sang our Coptic hymn "KERIOS ISOS PEKHRISTOS ..." that's in the doxologies. I counted the names..
Mark and Luke were not in there. They were certainly gospel writers, and disciples, but as far as I can see, they were not apostles.
Yes, OK.. you are saying that they were part of the 70?!
Well, for me, I'm saying they were not part of 12 Apostles chosen.
St Mark was clearly not one of the 12 but there are more Apostles than the 12, (as I said very clearly ;))
There were the 70 and then all the others who had the ministry of an Apostle. Among them, for instance Andronicus and Junia, mentioned in Romans. And this ministry continues into our own age.
I should also say that when St Peter is explaining that the prophesy of the Holy Prophet Joel is being fufilled which says..
(Act 2:17) And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:
this clearly indicates, as far as I can see, that the tongues of fire had fallen upon both the men and women present. It would not make sense otherwise, and St Peter would have to say that the prophecy had been half fulfilled if it the Spirit had only come upon the men.
Well that always confused me; the deal with the apostles and disciples.
Concerning the number 70...I was alwys taught 2 teachings. One I'd that the the bible rounded the number. The other is that we count saint Paul and saint Athanasius to be part of them.
[quote author=minagir link=topic=8455.msg107398#msg107398 date=1256846408] We always say that 12 Disciples and 72 Apostles.
This is how I understood it, and perhaps the confusion also with Fr. Peter:
Christ had 12 Apostles and the rest were disciples.. even the 72.
But it is STILL a shame, in my opinion, that St Mark was not one of the 12.
Anyway, back to the point: how do we know for sure that the women present in that room when the Holy Spirit came on them, that they didnt speak in different tongues / languages?
I keep telling you that the tongues of fire fell on all who were in the room, Men and women. Including St Mary. Otherwise the prophecy of the holy Prophet Joel wouldn't make sense when St Peter quotes it.
The Holy Spirit fell on all, and all praised God in the languages of the world.
What I mean is: you've explained that the women also received the tongues of fire. But as we know, the Apostles who received the tongues of fire were able to speak in different languages. Did the women also have that ability (in speaking in different languages).
What I mean is: you've explained that the women also received the tongues of fire. But as we know, the Apostles who received the tongues of fire were able to speak in different languages. Did the women also have that ability (in speaking in different languages).
I'm pretty sure that EVERYONE (both men and women) who received the tongues of fire was able to speak in the different languages. But someone correct if im wrong
The question is: why would they be given the gifts of speaking in tongues if the purpose of speaking in tongues was to evangelise? Who were they expected to evangelise to as women and in what capacity if they were not allowed to speak in Churches (or temples)?
[quote author=peterfarrington link=topic=8455.msg107414#msg107414 date=1256854914] Are you deliberately not reading my posts ???
I've already said that the miracle at Pentecost was not to do with the gift of tongues or evangelism.
It was the fulfilment of Joel, the reversal of Babel, and a sign of the universalising of salvation.
Father Peter
Yes, I have understood your post. But, how is it after the tongues of fire landed on each of their heads that only some spoke languages and some didn't (i.e. the women). You must admit, it was from this episode that they could speaks in different tongues.
But my question is so simple: Whether or not it was about evangelism, COULD the women speak in tongues? Were they also given this gift on that day (as per what the Apostles received)??
Let me make this perfectly clear:
As you say, the day of the pentecost was a fulfillment for mankind's salvation. No doubt that our nature was renewed through Christ, that we were able to accept the Holy Spirit.
OK..
But my question is this:
Were the women able to speak in tongues on that day?
I don't see that anyone received the Gift of Tongues on this day.
The descriptions of the Gift of Tongues in the NT are completely different to what happened at Pentecost.
Pentecost was a particular miracle, the Gift of Tongues was something else.
Nowhere is it suggested by any of the Fathers that the Apostles (however many we want to count) could generally speak other languages by way of a miracle, or that the Gift of Tongues was a gift of fluency in other languages.
They are two completely different things as far as I can see.
The women participated at Pentecost in the sign, by receiving the fire and praising in other languages. The Gift of Tongues is something else, and was never given for evangelism. Indeed St Paul is clear. When someone who is not a believer comes in and hears you praying in Tongues then he will think you are mad!
[quote author=peterfarrington link=topic=8455.msg107418#msg107418 date=1256855616] I don't see that anyone received the Gift of Tongues on this day.
The descriptions of the Gift of Tongues in the NT are completely different to what happened at Pentecost.
Pentecost was a particular miracle, the Gift of Tongues was something else.
Nowhere is it suggested by any of the Fathers that the Apostles (however many we want to count) could generally speak other languages by way of a miracle, or that the Gift of Tongues was a gift of fluency in other languages.
They are two completely different things as far as I can see.
The women participated at Pentecost in the sign, by receiving the fire and praising in other languages. The Gift of Tongues is something else, and was never given for evangelism. Indeed St Paul is clear. When someone who is not a believer comes in and hears you praying in Tongues then he will think you are mad!
That's not the best evangelism tool :)
Father Peter
Thanks Fr. Peter.
Mina - i think I need to sit down for a minute and write down the sequence of events. I'm beginning to forget the order in which things happened.
Look, its not as if I'm being lazy, but if someone could kindly write down the sequence of events that took place after Christ rose from the dead and ascended into heaven, I would be eternally grateful.
Before the ascension of Jesus, the 12 apostles were referred to as the chosen desciples,cos they were still students of Jesus. The initially chosen were only 12. Then we also have the secret desciples such us Nikodimus and Joseph of Arimathea and the 70. Surprisingly, St Constantine the great is also referred as the 13th apostle as well.
Comments
Hi
On the day of the Pentecost, did the tongues of fire fall on the heads of the women present?
Thanks
in Luke 1:
12 Then they returned to Jerusalem from the mount called Olivet, which is near Jerusalem, a Sabbath day's journey. 13 And when they had entered, they went up into the upper room where they were staying: Peter, James, ... with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with His brothers.
Then in the beginning of next chapter:
1 When the Day of Pentecost had fully come, they were all with one accord* in one place. 2 And suddenly there came a sound from heaven, as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled the whole house where they were sitting. 3 Then there appeared to them divided tongues, as of fire, and one sat upon each of them. 4 And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.
you tell me.....
It doesn't say whether the tongues of fire went on the heads of the women also.
In that case, if it did fall on the women's heads, did they also speak in other languages like the apostles?
I just thought that the reason why we do not allow women priests is that the tongues of fire did not descend on them.
I guess if it fell on all of them, and by that it means the women too, then that answers the quesstion.
I was always under the impression that the women, although present, did not benefit of that.
Cheers.
[quote author=QT_PA_2T link=topic=8455.msg107328#msg107328 date=1256704611]
In that case, if it did fall on the women's heads, did they also speak in other languages like the apostles?
I just thought that the reason why we do not allow women priests is that the tongues of fire did not descend on them.
thinking that way is wrong. the dwelling of the Spirit was the beginning of the Spirit that comes upon us ALL when we are baptized.
A great lecture i have heard about is here:
http://peterkreeft.com/audio/09_priestesses.htm
it is for Dr. Peter Kreeft, a professor of philosophy at Boston College and at the King's College (Empire State Building), in New York City.
But could the women present also speak in different languages?
1 Tim 2:12 "But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence." This is where the teaching that women cannot become priests comes from. If you can read Iconography properly you will see that yes indeed Our Holy Mother St. Mary has tounges of fire, usually represented as a flame above the head.
It was actually thanks to such an icon of the pentecost that I asked this question. I came across it at st takla . Org website whilst looking for hymns on the pentecost.
So, what u r saying is that although they received the tongues of fire , they did not receive the gift of speaking in tongues that was given to go and preach the gospel?
The gift of tongues was a miraculous sign, but I don't think it is the same as the ministry of evangelism. I believe that all of those present were inspired to give praise to God, both male and female. It was a powerful witness to the universality of the Gospel.
The crowd gathered because they could hear all the noise in the house, and then I understand that St Peter and the Apostles came out and spoke to the crowd.
Does that make sense?
God bless
Father Peter
Thanks for your answer. Yes, it makes sense. I did associate the tongue of fire with the gifts that it brought to evangelise. I guess i should not have done that.
So, how do we know that they didnt speak in other languages also?? You mean to say that it was only the 12 apostles who spoke in tongues/languages?
Also, just a side question: St Mark and St Luke were not apostles. This is extremely disappointing - but were they also able to speak in tongues? Saint Mark obviously managed get by speaking a bit of Greek with Coptic to have evangelised all of Egypt; but I guess that must have been from his education, rather than a gift of the Holy Spirit. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
I think that St Luke and St Mark were certainly Apostles. There were the 12 Apostles, and then the Seventy Apostles, and then St Paul was an Apostle, and the gift of Apostleship is given to the Church as a continuing grace and ministry. In one sense it is found in our Bishops and their role as guarantors of the Apostolic deposit. The early Church writers explicitly state that the Bishops are the successors of the Apostles, and this means more than just the 12.
The bishops are our Apostles, or are in fact Apostles.
Bishop Markos is a good example of a bishop also being engaged in a Church Planting ministry where his Apostolic grace is clearly manifest. But each bishop has the service of 'building up' the Church which is under his care.
I think that we must understand the manifestation at Pentecost as being different from the Gift of Tongues. This manifestation at Pentecost was the reversal of Babel. Where the tongues of men had once been confused by God because of their pride, now God is uniting all men, and women, in the praise of God. I am sure that the women were also praising God and were all heard out of the windows of the Upper Room where they were meeting. But I believe that probably it was some of the Apostles who went downstairs and outside to address the crowd.
The gift of tongues as we understand it from the NT is not the hearing of your own language from the mouth of someone who does not know it - as happened at Pentecost. Rather within the worship of the Church it was an outpouring of praise in a language that was unknown, followed by an interpretation. I don't believe this had or has anything to do with using language in evangelism.
St Mark knew Greek, and this would have got him by in Egypt. He might have learned some Coptic. But I imagine that his mission was directed at the Greek speaking folk around Alexandria.
As I said, the tongues of fire fell on the men AND the women. And I am sure that the men and women, both Apostles and believers, praised God in this miraculous way. It was the commotion which drew the crowd. But I do think that it was just a few of the Apostles, led by St Peter, who went outside to explain what was happening. It was not all going on in the street.
God bless
Father Peter
Hi QT
I think that St Luke and St Mark were certainly Apostles. There were the 12 Apostles, and then the Seventy Apostles, and then St Paul was an Apostle, and the gift of Apostleship is given to the Church as a continuing grace and ministry. In one sense it is found in our Bishops and their role as guarantors of the Apostolic deposit. The early Church writers explicitly state that the Bishops are the successors of the Apostles, and this means more than just the 12.
The bishops are our Apostles, or are in fact Apostles.
Bishop Markos is a good example of a bishop also being engaged in a Church Planting ministry where his Apostolic grace is clearly manifest. But each bishop has the service of 'building up' the Church which is under his care.
I think that we must understand the manifestation at Pentecost as being different from the Gift of Tongues. This manifestation at Pentecost was the reversal of Babel. Where the tongues of men had once been confused by God because of their pride, now God is uniting all men, and women, in the praise of God. I am sure that the women were also praising God and were all heard out of the windows of the Upper Room where they were meeting. But I believe that probably it was some of the Apostles who went downstairs and outside to address the crowd.
The gift of tongues as we understand it from the NT is not the hearing of your own language from the mouth of someone who does not know it - as happened at Pentecost. Rather within the worship of the Church it was an outpouring of praise in a language that was unknown, followed by an interpretation. I don't believe this had or has anything to do with using language in evangelism.
St Mark knew Greek, and this would have got him by in Egypt. He might have learned some Coptic. But I imagine that his mission was directed at the Greek speaking folk around Alexandria.
As I said, the tongues of fire fell on the men AND the women. And I am sure that the men and women, both Apostles and believers, praised God in this miraculous way. It was the commotion which drew the crowd. But I do think that it was just a few of the Apostles, led by St Peter, who went outside to explain what was happening. It was not all going on in the street.
God bless
Father Peter
lol...
hahahaha
Thank God for that (if its true)!!! Because, I was told that St Mark was not one of the 12.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isnt an Apostle one of the 12 apostles. St Mark was a disciple?
He was not one of the 12,
I just sang our Coptic hymn "KERIOS ISOS PEKHRISTOS ..." that's in the doxologies. I counted the names..
Mark and Luke were not in there. They were certainly gospel writers, and disciples, but as far as I can see, they were not apostles.
Yes, OK.. you are saying that they were part of the 70?!
Well, for me, I'm saying they were not part of 12 Apostles chosen.
There were the 70 and then all the others who had the ministry of an Apostle. Among them, for instance Andronicus and Junia, mentioned in Romans. And this ministry continues into our own age.
God bless
Father Peter
(Act 2:17) And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:
this clearly indicates, as far as I can see, that the tongues of fire had fallen upon both the men and women present. It would not make sense otherwise, and St Peter would have to say that the prophecy had been half fulfilled if it the Spirit had only come upon the men.
Father Peter
The 12 Apostles are described in the Gospels, and there are many others there who are called Disciples.
Our Lord sent out another 70 Apostles, not 72.
And there were other Apostles in the early Church, and the Bishops are explicitly described as inheriting the Apostolic ministry in the Fathers.
God bless
Father Peter
Concerning the number 70...I was alwys taught 2 teachings. One I'd that the the bible rounded the number. The other is that we count saint Paul and saint Athanasius to be part of them.
We always say that 12 Disciples and 72 Apostles.
This is how I understood it, and perhaps the confusion also with Fr. Peter:
Christ had 12 Apostles and the rest were disciples.. even the 72.
But it is STILL a shame, in my opinion, that St Mark was not one of the 12.
Anyway, back to the point: how do we know for sure that the women present in that room when the Holy Spirit came on them, that they didnt speak in different tongues / languages?
Not sure what you mean QT.
I keep telling you that the tongues of fire fell on all who were in the room, Men and women. Including St Mary. Otherwise the prophecy of the holy Prophet Joel wouldn't make sense when St Peter quotes it.
The Holy Spirit fell on all, and all praised God in the languages of the world.
Father Peter
What I mean is: you've explained that the women also received the tongues of fire. But as we know, the Apostles who received the tongues of fire were able to speak in different languages. Did the women also have that ability (in speaking in different languages).
What I mean is: you've explained that the women also received the tongues of fire. But as we know, the Apostles who received the tongues of fire were able to speak in different languages. Did the women also have that ability (in speaking in different languages).
I'm pretty sure that EVERYONE (both men and women) who received the tongues of fire was able to speak in the different languages. But someone correct if im wrong
Father Peter
No prizes for guessing what my question will be!!
Go on have a guess? What will my next question be?
have a guess?
....
The question is: why would they be given the gifts of speaking in tongues if the purpose of speaking in tongues was to evangelise? Who were they expected to evangelise to as women and in what capacity if they were not allowed to speak in Churches (or temples)?
I've already said that the miracle at Pentecost was not to do with the gift of tongues or evangelism.
It was the fulfilment of Joel, the reversal of Babel, and a sign of the universalising of salvation.
Father Peter
Are you deliberately not reading my posts ???
I've already said that the miracle at Pentecost was not to do with the gift of tongues or evangelism.
It was the fulfilment of Joel, the reversal of Babel, and a sign of the universalising of salvation.
Father Peter
Yes, I have understood your post. But, how is it after the tongues of fire landed on each of their heads that only some spoke languages and some didn't (i.e. the women). You must admit, it was from this episode that they could speaks in different tongues.
But my question is so simple: Whether or not it was about evangelism, COULD the women speak in tongues? Were they also given this gift on that day (as per what the Apostles received)??
Let me make this perfectly clear:
As you say, the day of the pentecost was a fulfillment for mankind's salvation. No doubt that our nature was renewed through Christ, that we were able to accept the Holy Spirit.
OK..
But my question is this:
Were the women able to speak in tongues on that day?
The descriptions of the Gift of Tongues in the NT are completely different to what happened at Pentecost.
Pentecost was a particular miracle, the Gift of Tongues was something else.
Nowhere is it suggested by any of the Fathers that the Apostles (however many we want to count) could generally speak other languages by way of a miracle, or that the Gift of Tongues was a gift of fluency in other languages.
They are two completely different things as far as I can see.
The women participated at Pentecost in the sign, by receiving the fire and praising in other languages. The Gift of Tongues is something else, and was never given for evangelism. Indeed St Paul is clear. When someone who is not a believer comes in and hears you praying in Tongues then he will think you are mad!
That's not the best evangelism tool :)
Father Peter
I don't see that anyone received the Gift of Tongues on this day.
The descriptions of the Gift of Tongues in the NT are completely different to what happened at Pentecost.
Pentecost was a particular miracle, the Gift of Tongues was something else.
Nowhere is it suggested by any of the Fathers that the Apostles (however many we want to count) could generally speak other languages by way of a miracle, or that the Gift of Tongues was a gift of fluency in other languages.
They are two completely different things as far as I can see.
The women participated at Pentecost in the sign, by receiving the fire and praising in other languages. The Gift of Tongues is something else, and was never given for evangelism. Indeed St Paul is clear. When someone who is not a believer comes in and hears you praying in Tongues then he will think you are mad!
That's not the best evangelism tool :)
Father Peter
Thanks Fr. Peter.
Mina - i think I need to sit down for a minute and write down the sequence of events. I'm beginning to forget the order in which things happened.