GCM Home | Your Posts | Rules | DONATE | Bookstore | Facebook | Twitter | FAQs


Author Topic: Pentecostal Apologetics  (Read 731 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline .:Lily:.

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 742
  • Manna: 17
  • Gender: Female
  • good bye
Pentecostal Apologetics
« on: Mon Jul 22, 2013 - 20:09:17 »
SPIRIT BAPTISM - Pentecostal Apologetics

"There is No Such thing as The Baptism of The Holy Spirit"

Bible college professors like to make the following statement:

"There is no extra 'baptism in the Spirit' for believers. When they become born-again they are filled with the Holy Spirit so there is no need for an extra 'baptism.'"

Cessationists are confused over the Holy-Spirit baptism because they are confused over the different shades of meaning that are expressed by the word "baptism."
 
Cessationists see verses such as Rom 6: 3, 1 Cor. 10: 2, Gal. 3: 27 (below), and they rightfully interpret that all who are saved are "baptized" into Christ. Their confusion is manifested when Bible writers use the word "baptism" for its primary meaning, which is, "to drench." The Greek word "baptizo" actually means, "drenching" or "immersion." For instance, every day, at fast-food resteraunts, people baptize french fries in oil. Therefore, a precise definition of a Christian "baptism" would have someone being fully submerged under water. The verses below show a more vague usage of the word "baptize."

"Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?" Rom. 6: 3

"Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea; And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea" 1 Cor 10: 1-2

"For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ." Gal. 3: 26-27


Baptizo is a soaking
 
But the proper definition of the word "baptizo" ("drenching") is something that not all Christians receive. For instance, there are many Christians who have never been baptized (drenched) in water, yet they may be said to be "baptized" in a more general sense. Therefore, within the church, are people who have been baptized according to the verses above, and yet, have never been "baptized."

When Bible writers use the word "baptism" to describe the Holy Spirit falling on someone causeing him to speak in tongues and prophecies, they are not speaking of "baptism" in a vague sense; rather they are speaking of a "drenching." They were speaking of a Holy-Spirit drenching that is a spiritual equivalent of a water-baptism. It was Jesus, Himself, who set this presidence by saying:
 
"For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence" Acts 1: 5


Jesus Breathed On Them

 Realize that Jesus spoke these words to people who already had the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, because Jesus had already breathed on them, commanding them to be filled with the Holy Ghost (John 20: 22). And later, Jesus' words in Acts 1: 5 were fulfilled when they were "baptized" at the Acts 2 Pentecostal outpouring that was accompanied by prophetic speech.

 On the first day of the week, when Jesus rose from the dead, He made several appearances. His last appearance of that day was in the evening when he breathed on His disciples [the apostles and others staying with them, per Luke 11: 24, 33] saying, "receive the Holy Spirit" (John 20: 23). At that point the Holy Spirit entered them and recreated their spirits, and they became born-again.

If the apostles were not saved before, they certainly were when Jesus breathed on them (when God brought spiritual life to Adam and Eve in the garden, he did so by breathing on them). The apostles had received the permanent indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit when Jesus breathed on them. After that, Jesus told them to wait for the promise (written of by Joel) of the Holy Spirit that they would be filled (again).


The Promised Holy Spirit

Some time before the outpouring of the Holy Spirit at the Acts 2 Pentecost, the risen Lord Jesus spoke to His disciples (the 11 apostles plus others) calling the outpouring, "the promise" that would be from the Father:
 
"ye are witnesses of these things. And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high" Luke. 24: 48-49

That is why Jesus refered to power that is the Holy-Spirit baptism; for a few verses after Acts 1: 5,  He describes the Spirit-baptism as power:
 
"But ye shall receive power after that the Holy Ghost has come upon you" Acts 1: 8

In the above verse, Jesus is not referring to the indwelling of the Spirit as a baptism. He is using the word "baptism" to describe a spiritual waterfall drenching a person causing prophetic speech/praises. Jesus, in Acts 1: 5-8, is using the word "baptized" not to describe the indwelling of the Holy Spirit that people receive at salvation. He is using baptism to describe the realization of Joel's prophecy that all believers may have prophetic knowledge, speech, and dreams.
 

1: 4 "And being assembled together with [them], commands them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, [saith he], ye have heard of me

1: 5 "For John truly baptized with water, but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence

1: 8 "But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you..."


Because there is a first-time that a person is overwhelmed by the Holy Spirit (sometimes accompanying the salvation experience, but many times at a later date than their salvation), and filled to overflowing so that tongues and prophecies of praise flows from his lips; the apostles (and Jesus/God) recognize it as a "drenching" that is said to be poured out onto the believer.

The promised "gift" of the Holy Spirit is so distinct from the indwelling of the Holy Spirit that people receive at salvation (and that the apostles received 50 days before Pentecost, per John 20: 23 ) that it is refered to not as an "indwelling," but oftentimes as an "outpouring" that will "come on" the believer:
 
Acts 1: 8 "But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost has come upon you"

Acts 2: 16-17 "But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel; 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"
 
Acts 2: 33 "Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, [the word "shed" is the same Greek word as "pour" in the verse above] which ye now see and hear" (Notice that the baptism of the Spirit is not the invisible indwelling; but, rather, "which ye now see and hear")

Acts 8: 15-16 "Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost: (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.)"

Acts 10: 44-45 "While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all... because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost"

Acts 19: 6 "And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied" A striking example, that the Holy-Spirit baptism is refering to a pouring-drenching, is in Acts 11: 16. When Peter was describing the events at Cornelius' house (the tongues-speaking in Acts 10). Notice that it was the prophetic speech that he realized was Jesus' description of a "baptism"

Acts 11: 15-16 "And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning. Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost" Jesus' words in the two verses below show that to Jesus, the Holy Spirit coming on them at Acts 2, and later Cornelius' house is actually a "baptism;" not simply an indwelling at salvation.
 
Acts 1:5 "For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost"
 
Acts 1:8 "But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you" A rendering of Jesus' words in Acts 1:5, and 1:8 may be understood as:
 
"when the Holy Spirit comes upon you; you will be baptized with power." or, "You will be baptized with power when the Holy Spirit comes upon you," or "The Holy spirit baptism is a power baptism," or any other such words.
 
But in no way, are Jesus' words refering to just the "indwelling" of the Holy Spirit that one has when he becomes born-again. And in Acts 8, Simon the sorceror saw that the Holy Spirit was given to the Samaritans when Peter and John laid their hands on them. When the sorceror attempted to buy this power, Peter refered to it as the "gift," saying: "And when Simon saw that through laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money, Saying, Give me also this power, that on whomsoever I lay hands, he may receive the Holy Ghost. But Peter said unto him, Thy money perish with thee, because thou hast thought that the gift of God may be purchased with money." (Acts 8: 18-20)
 
The "gift" spoken of by Peter to the sorceror was not simply the indwelling one receives at salvation. The "gift" was the baptism of the Holy Spirit because that was what was promised and given at the Acts 2 Pentecost. (although, in the verses above, it is not mentioned that there was a "baptism" or tongues, and prophecies--but the sorceror certainly saw something powerful happen or he would not have been desireous to buy it).

Cessationists ask, What purpose does this "baptism" serve? The answer to that question is that the baptism is a filling-to-overflowing that causes prophetic praise (not just an indwelling); for example: 

 "And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance... we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God" Acts 2: 4, 11
 
The result of the baptism is tongues and prophecies. But it may also be the time that God anoints the believer, and bestows upon him the spiritual gift(s) that He has for him. The baptism may cause the believer to evangelize with signs, wonders, and various miracles, and acts of faith. But Jesus does refer to the baptism as the source of power that is available to all Christians:
 
"ye are witnesses of these things. And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high" Luke. 24: 48-49

The words above are not just for the apostles and disciples (followers) of Christ, but for us also; as it is we and our children that will take the Gospel to "all nations" and "to the ends of the earth." All who reject the idea of a Pentecostal extra baptism have never spoke in tongues. Every single person who speaks in tongues knows it to be an extra baptism. Cessationists do not understand, as they are on the outside looking in--which is why they liken it to emotion.


One Faith, One Lord, and One Baptism

Cessationists like to qoute the verses below to say that there is only one baptism (meaning, the salvation experience is the only baptism):
 
"There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; One Lord, one faith, one baptism, One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all" Eph. 4: 4-6
 
"For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body" 1 Cor. 12: 13
 
If there is only one baptism, it includes tongues and prophecies. Concerning the Ephesian verse above, it needs to be noted that the baptism contains the gifts of the Spirit, as that is the very next verse:
 
"But unto every one of us is given grace according to the measure of the gift of Christ. Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men... And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers" Eph. 4: 7-11
 
Concerning the Corinthian verse, it needs to be noted that both before, and after that verse the "one body" is made up of spiritual gifts:
 
"The manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man... to another the gifts of healing... to another the working of miracles; to another prophecy... to another divers kinds of tongues... For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body... And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles... diversities of tongues" 1 Cor. 12: 7-28



Tongues are The Least of The Gifts For Teaching, but For Praise They are #1

It is Said That Pentecostals Over-Emphasize Tongues. But Actually, According to The Verse Below, Tongues are as Important as Prophecy--For Their Interpretation is "Prophecy"
 
"For greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying." 1 Cor. 14: 5

There are four passages of scripture (below) that cessationists use to "show" that tongues-speaking is not very important. In passages #1, and #2, cessationists say that "tongues" is listed near the bottom of the lists of spiritual gifts. They say that by placing "tongues" near the bottom of the lists, Paul is showing us that tongues are not very important. In passages #3, and #4, cessationists say that "tongues" is not even mentioned as a gift. This is again, to show us (supposedly) that tongues are not very important:

1) "But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal. For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit; To another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit; To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another divers kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues:" 1 Cor. 12: 7-10


Cessationist Error

First of all, the obvious problem with cessationist thinking is that Paul never says that he is listing the gifts of the Spirit in a descending ranking order. Also, to be consistent in their thinking, they would have to say that the interpretation of tongues is not as important as tongues-speaking, because it is listed below "tongues." Thirdly, the message of wisdom and knowledge ("ranked" first and second on the list above) are actually "prophecy" just as tongues-interpreted is. When cessationists say that tongues is not very important, they are saying that prophesying is not important either.
 
2) "And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues... But covet earnestly the best gifts" 1 Cor. 12: 28-31
 
In passage #2 the cessationist confusion lies in that only the first three gifts are listed in ranking order, with all the other gifts lumped together as fourth. Notice that the gifts of miracles, and healings, are listed above the gifts of administration (leadership). Now what cessationist would admit that? Also, if cessationist theology is correct; those who are in leadership positions (administration) are not as important as those who help them ("those able to help others"). For they are lower on the "list." The "best gifts," according to Paul (in 1 Cor. 12-14) are "prophecy," and "interpretation." But, of course, "love" is most important. But it must be mentioned that Paul was writing to the Corinthians concerning their church-services. Therefore, for the church proper: interpretation, and prophecy are the most important gifts, with "apostles," and "prophets" being the most important offices.

3) "Having then gifts differing according to the grace that is given to us, whether prophecy, let us prophesy according to the proportion of faith; Or ministry, let us wait on our ministering: or he that teacheth, on teaching; Or he that exhorteth, on exhortation: he that giveth, let him do it with simplicity; he that ruleth, with diligence; he that sheweth mercy, with cheerfulness." Romans 12: 6-8

In #3, tongues is not listed; but neither is pastoring. Do cessationists really want to say that pastoring is not important because it is not even on the list? Actually, tongues-speaking and interpretations are included in "prophesying" and pastoring is included in "leadership" in the verse above.

4) "And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ" Eph. 4: 11-12
 
Although tongues is not listed, it is included in "prophets;" that is, if one has the "gift" of tongues for God to use to speak to a church by such a prophet. Number 4 is a blatent statement that prophetic speaking (prophets) will be here for the church-age. In short; tongues-speaking is so important that God allows every person to do it. That is why, when you read of someone speaking in tongues, you read that "all" (everyone praying) also speaks in tongues:

"And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance." Acts 2: 4

"While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word... speak with tongues" Acts 10: 44-46
 
"And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them [on all them, unless someone was left out]; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied." Acts 19: 6


Cessation Confusion

Cessationists are confused because there is a tongues-speaking that all may do (a prayer- praise language), and there is also a "gift" of tongues (that is, the ability to give a message in tongues from God to another person) that is used often in church services. Just as there is an amount of faith that all Christians have, and an amount of discernment that all Christians have, but there also is a "gift" of faith, and a "gift" of discernment that not all Christians have. Someone once said that the most common prayer God hears is, "Lord, bless my finances." Chances are, that if you are talking to someone who tells you that prophetic speaking is not very important, you are talking to someone who thinks that praying for financial blessings (worldy possessions) are important.


"Biblical Tongues Were Always Known Languages--Not The 'Gibberish' You Hear in Pentecostal Churches Today."

Romans 8: 26 and "gibberish"

It should be noted that cessationists believe that the Spirit prayer of Romans 8: 26 (below) is for us today. What they do not realize is that Rom. 8:26 either describes quiet/silent tongues-speaking, or it is a prophetic phenomenon that is 99% the same as "tongues."

"Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered. And he that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit, because he maketh intercession for the saints according to the will of God." Rom. 8: 26-27

Does the Holy Spirit pray to the Father on our behalf in a known earthly language? Or does He pray/talk/intercede for us in a Spirit-language? Why then, must every prayer to God by the Spirt's power be in a known earthly language?

The problem, of course, is that cessationists can not pray by the Spirit's power; so they assume that you and I can not either; then they must assume that all tongues-speech is not for prayer and praise to God, but rather, for it is for evangelism--to speak to people in their own language. This charge is answered in the  "TONGUES EDIFY" article on this site which refutes  the "gibberish theory" by showing that there are many different kinds of tongues-speaking. There is a tongues that is a prayer to God, (quietly, or silently), and there is a tongues that is a message for the church (out loud). There is a tongues-speaking from the prophetic spirit that dwells inside of a man (qiuetly, silently, or loudly), and there is a tongues-speaking that is from God's Spirit that is outside of man--coming directly from God speaking through a man (qiuetly, silently, or loudly). There is a tongues that is strictly a praise of God, (quietly. or loudly), and there is a tongues that is a more serious heart prayer to God (silently, and described in Rom. 8: 26)


In Context

The context of the above verses is that of the saints praying (Rom 8: 26); therefore, it is a time when one prays and the Holy Spirit takes over and prays through him ("through him" because his heart is being searched as he prays. This is not a case of the Holy Spirit or Jesus in heaven interceding for a man while that person may or may not be in prayer ). The man has initiated the praying himself, therefore he cannot be separated from what is going on; in fact, he continues praying while the Holy Spirit prays through him. This is probably "tongues." But if not, it is very similar (a variation of tongues; a manifestation of tongues), as the man could very well be making vocal sounds or groans as the Spirit prays through him--and that certainly would not be in an understandable foriegn language. 1 Cor. 14: 28 (below), speaks of "tongues" that is either similar, or identical to Rom. 8: 26.
 
"But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God." 1 Cor. 14: 28

The above verse is similar to Rom. 8: 26 when a man is praying prophetically (in tongues), but silently. He does this by the prophetic spirit that lives inside of him. But 14: 28 is identical to 8: 26 when the man is praying prophetically (in tongues--a variation of tongues) but it is God's Spirit--from God Himself, who is actually initiating and doing the praying. This is similar to when God has a message for the congregation, and He speaks to the congregation through a man in tongues and interpretations, or prophesies through a man--this is not when a man is simply praising God in tongues by the prophetic spirit that dwells inside of him; but, rather, God Himself operating the Holy Spirit within a man.

If a cessationist says that " tongues are always foriegn languages," or "there is no tongues speaking today;" then he is saying that he knows everything about Rom. 8: 26-27, and that he knows for a fact that as man and Spirit pray together, there will not be one prayer-sound coming from the mans mouth (which would then make it a vocal prayer language), and that the word, "groanings" in that verse does not actually mean "groanings." The two verses below show a tongues that is from man to God, that is not in a foriegn language for other men to understand:
 
"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." 1 Cor. 14: 2
 
"Else when thou shalt bless with the spirit, how shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned say Amen at thy giving of thanks, seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest?" 1 Cor. 14: 16
 
If tongues are always foriegn languages, then there is no reason for anyone to do it alone (where no foriegners could hear). Also, there would have been no reason for the Ephesians (of Acts 19) or for Cornelius' family (Acts 10) to speak in tongues since there were no foriegners there to understand it. Because God has the ability to cause one to pray to Him in a foriegn dialect, He can also cause one to pray in a better, more expressive heavenly language. When a cessationist says that "tongues are always foriegn languages;" he is saying that he has heard every single tongues-prayer, tongues-praise, and tongues-message that anyone anywhere has ever spoken, and has realized that they are always foriegn languages.


A Note:  The "TONGUES EDIFY" article on this site thouroughly refutes  the "gibberish theory" by showing that there are many different kinds of tongues-speaking. There is a tongues that is a prayer to God, (quietly, or silently), and there is a tongues that is a message for the church (out loud). There is a tongues-speaking from the prophetic spirit that dwells inside of a man (qiuetly, silently, or loudly), and there is a tongues-speaking that is from God's Spirit that is outside of man--coming directly from God speaking through a man (qiuetly, silently, or loudly). There is a tongues that is strictly a praise of God, (quietly. or loudly), and there is a tongues that is a more serious heart prayer to God (silently, and described in Rom. 8: 26)


Heavenly Language

Is it not possible that a heavenly language can be more dynamic, and express a far more complexity of thought than any man-made language can? Why do cessationists insist that all tongues-speaking must be in known foriegn languages? If tongues-speaking is always to men okay; but much tongues-speaking is to God. Does God only understand earthly languages? Does the Holy Spirit only speak through earthly languages--the silly languages of man? When we pray to God in an earthly language, we cannot express complex thoughts very fast. He has to wait for us to speak one word at a time, with our limited earthly vocabulary. For instance if I am outside and I see a blue 1966 Pontiac drive by, I might say, "I like that 66' Pontiac." But the complex thought that I would be trying to express by those words are as follows: 1) "I like that aqua blue color--it reminds me of the ocean." 2) "I like that real metal, and the shiny, silver chrome looks of a pureness that makes me think of living on a beautiful planet that has no litter, trash, or anything that defiles." 3) "It reminds me of the good-old-days when there was less crime, and children would pray in their school buildings". 4) "The reflection of the sun on the car reminds me of being at the beach on a warm sunny day." And many other such thoughts would all be contained in the statement, "I like that 66' Pontiac." But why try to communicate such detailed thoughts in an earthly language? For there would never be enough time to do so! And cessationists would have us believe that when we pray to God it must always be in a one-dimensional earthly language--even when it is God's Holy Spirit that is praying to God (through us)!
      Paul makes it clear that there is a heavenly language, as he goes so far to describe it as angelic speech:

"Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels" 1 Cor 13:1

Paul makes sure to say that the angelic speech is beside that of human languages, as he uses the word, "and" to show that it is in addition to the languages of men. But cessationists have come up with an answer for 1 Cor. 13:1. They say that Paul is using the literary technique of "hyperbole" (exagerration to make a point) to show that love is more important than prophetic speech. They refer to the verses below:

"Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity [love], I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal. And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing. And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing." 1 Cor. 13: 1-3


Hyperbole

Cessationists say that there are exagerations in the above verses. They point out that Paul certainly cannot understand all mysteries, or move mountains whenever he pleases. Therefore, they say that he cannot speak the (heavenly) language of angels either. But they are actually reading too much into the text. For angelic speech is an excellent way to describe heavenly tongues. There is a bad implication of what the cessationists are saying; for hyperbole is used to clarify something--To make a point clear. But cessationists imply that Paul did not know how to use hyperbole correctly; so instead of clarifying the issue, he confused it. If cessationists are correct, then Paul used the wrong example of hyperbole. If cessationists are correct, the hyperbolic statement that Paul should have made (to show that all tongues are earthly languages) is thus:

"If I speak in the tongues of all nations but have not charity ..."

The hyperbole exageration would then be realized because Paul certainly does not speak the tongues of every single tribe on the planet; rather, he would be using hyperbole to show that "tongues" are the many earthly languages. That is why; as mentioned earlier, that Paul uses the word "and" (in 13: 1) to show that he speaks in a language that is beside that of men. Notice how accurately Luke uses hyperbole:

"And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven" Acts 2: 5

Of course there were not Jews there from "every" single nation on the entire planet. But Luke's hyperbolic statement, "every nation under heaven" is accurate; meaning that there were Jews gathered there from all over the place. Cessationist will admit that Luke knows how to use hyperbole properly; and if asked, they will admit that they, themselves (and millions of school-children), know how to use hyperbole correctly, to clarify--not confuse an issue. Why, then, do they insist that Paul does not use hyperbole correctly by saying that "tongues of angels" actually means "tongues of men," As "earthly," rather than "heavenly" languages.

This whole issue of earthly/heavenly languages "hyperbole" is cleared up by reading something from the Old Testament (below): Remembering that God rained down manna (miraculous grain) from heaven to sustain the wandering Israelites:
 
"And the manna was as coriander seed, and the colour thereof as the colour of bdellium. And the people went about, and gathered it, and ground it in mills, or beat it in a mortar, and baked it in pans, and made cakes of it: and the taste of it was as the taste of fresh oil. And when the dew fell upon the camp in the night, the manna fell upon it." Numbers 11: 7-9

Now, there are weak Christians (or non-Christians) who doubt the miraculous nature of the manna. They say, "The 'manna' is actually the coriander seed that is still found in the East today." They then say that Asaph, who wrote Psalm 78 (below) was actually using "hyperbole" when he wrote that "Man did eat angels' food." They say that Asaph used a hyperbolic _expression, "angels' food" to describe an earthly bread that the Hebrews never had before. However, according to Asaph (The Psalmist), it is a miraculous, heavenly food:
 
"Though he had commanded the clouds from above, and opened the doors of heaven, And had rained down manna upon them to eat, and had given them of the corn of heaven. Man did eat angels' food" Psalm 78: 23-24
 
About this hyperbole; ask the cessationist if Asaph used the phrase, "angels' food" to describe earthly food or to describe heavenly food. Cessationists are in a dilemma. They are forced to use a double standard by saying that "angels' food" is a hyperbole that describes heavenly, rather than earthly bread; but that "tongues of angels" in 1 Cor. is a hyperbole that describes an earthly, rather than a heavenly language.


Read more : http://www.pentecostal-tongues-theology.org/
 
Copyright 2006 - 2007. Peter Kwiatkowski.  This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Public Domain License.



Christian Forums and Message Board

Pentecostal Apologetics
« on: Mon Jul 22, 2013 - 20:09:17 »