I had a
list of (supposed) Impossible to Answer questions
directed toward Pentecostals that someone sent to me.
They claimed that NO Person who held Pentecostal beliefs
could answer these. The amusing thing is that MANY of
these questions concerning Pentecostal beliefs don't seem
to be Pentecostal at all.
case, though, let me answer these "Impossible Questions"
If salvation is "solely by grace," why are not all people
saved since "the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath
appeared to all men" (Titus
Where did you get such an idea that Pentecostals believe
that? Most Pentecostals do NOT believe that. (At least
none of the ones I've known for 42 years). Let me answer
anyway. Salvation is NOT solely by grace. Salvation is
by OBEYING the gospel as spelled out not only in the book
of Acts (chapters 2, 8, 10, 16, 19) but also by the
Apostle Paul (Romans 6, Colossians 2, Galatians 3). I'm
not sure, friend, how you came to this question while
browsing THIS site!
Since Acts 2:38 teaches that the baptism commanded is "for
the remission of sins," is there any reason to believe
that any other cases of water baptism were practiced for
any other reason (e.g., Acts 10:48, 19:5)? [If so, where
are the scriptures that indicate it?]
I'm not sure I understand what you're asking here, but I
think the question is "Can you prove that baptism was
practiced for any other reason (other than the 'remission
of sins')"? Is that the real question? The answer to
that is NO. Baptism is not for any other reason. It is
for the "REMISSION of SINS" just like the scriptures say.
The scriptures you quote are exactly correct and show that
there was a COMMAND given to those disciples who began to
believe at those times. Paul himself states that he was
told to "Arise and wash away his sins, calling on the name
of the Lord" (Acts 22:16)
Since Acts 8:36-38 teaches that baptism is by immersion
(i.e., "down into water" ... "up out of the water"), is
there any reason to believe that any other cases of water
baptism were practiced in a different way (e.g., Acts
2:41, 10:48, 16:15,33)?
Uh...I think you're questions have been directed to the
wrong person. Baptism IS by immersion, and you're asking
me if I believe there is any other way? Not at all. We
see the examples of Jesus in John 3:23. Though it says he
baptized not, but his disciples did, we see the statement
for the reason they were there. "There was much water
there" Now we also have the example (in addition to the
scriptures you quoted above) of the Eunuch. Acts 8:38-39
indicates that Philip and the Eunuch went DOWN INTO the
water and that when they "CAME UP OUT OF" the water,
Philip was "caught away".
Since all examples of miracles in the NT were definitive
and clearly visible signs, wonders and powers [review them
all to verify this], why apply the word miracle (in the
biblical sense) to things that clearly do not fit that
description today? God acts in the affairs of men today,
but if these actions qualified as NT miracles, they would
be impossible to deny (Jn. 11:47-53, Acts 4:13-22).
I agree with you whole heartedly in your question and I
have asked the same thing many times. I do know of
several times, though, that it is absolutely impossible to
deny a miracle.
a child who was pronounced dead at birth and who suddenly
32 minutes later gasped for breath. Circumstance? I
think not. I was diagnosed by several different eye
surgeons in 1992 and 1993 with having cellophane
maculopathy, an incurable eye disease which can cause
rapid loss of vision. There was no doubt from these
Military doctors that this disease (disorder if you will)
was present. It is medically documented and verifiable.
After much fasting a prayer, my eyesight was cured
instantaneously when I received prayer from a fellow
minister whom I did not know and who knew absolutely
nothing about me. I have no traces of the disease and no
after effects or scarring from it. The medical reports
were quite lengthy and now state that (quote) "only a
miracle could explain the sudden absence of cellophane
maculopathy as previously verified in this patient's
medical records". I could go on about several others. It
matters little to me whether you believe or not. Truth
cannot and will not be denied.
finish the answer according to your question though. Does
God act in the affairs of men today? Yes. Undeniably,
yes. How does he do that? Can you provide me with a few
examples yourself? Now, do I call everything a miracle?
Not at all. I have seen many instances where someone
receives prayer for a "cold" or cancer or some other need
and continue in the medical sciences receiving treatment
until finally it disappears and folks call THAT a
miracle. I on the other hand DO NOT call that a
miracle. I call that deception. There is NO instance
of a miracle that took weeks and weeks to happen. Not
a single one. There is only ONE instance of Jesus praying
for a man twice. (Matthew 8:22-26).
most part, I have to ask your same question to many who
are in Pentecostal churches today. "Why do you call a
'recovery' of a sinus infection (which by the way you've
spent much money and taken much medication for) that
clears up after 6 weeks, a 'miracle'?" Why do you do
If we cannot understand the bible alike, how are we to
understand the confusion being generated by everyone
claiming to speak under the influence of the Holy Spirit
I've often asked the same question. I can say with a
surety, that there are MANY who "claim" to speak under the
influence of the Holy Spirit, but who forget one very
important thing. They ignore the fact that IF and WHEN
God speaks today through anyone, he will NEVER violate his
Word to do so. I believe there are many who say "God told
me" that have no clue what they are talking about.
summary to that: Not everything that "CLAIMS" something
really has it. Look at Acts 16:16-18. This woman
followed Paul around (apparently trying to make herself
out to be a part of that ministry). Paul discerned the
spirit which was inside her and cast it out.
believe Pentecostals today are walking some very dangerous
ground in many of their claims that they have a "word"
from the Lord.
If someone receives the Holy Spirit when they are saved
or at baptism, why did the Samaritans, who were saved, in
Acts 8 not yet have the Holy Spirit?
Again, I must say that you have asked your questions of
the wrong person here. I DO NOT believe you received the
Holy Ghost (or Spirit) if you will, at the moment of
salvation or at baptism. The scriptures don't even teach
that, as you've pointed out already.
This isn't a question but a statement from the
scriptures: Someone claiming to speak in tongues and
heal, should also be able to drink deadly poison, be
unaffected by the bites of poisonous snakes, and heal with
Actually, this question (statement) is a totally misguided
one on your part to which I will only briefly answer.
Nowhere in the scriptures do you see anyone WILLINGLY
drinking poison or WILLINGLY being bitten by a viper and
living. It is a fool who would willingly do such things.
We have Paul's account in Acts chapter 28, of being bitten
by a viper and he just "shook it off". A quick reading of
Foxe's Book of Martyrs will show you some other very
amazing things such as this, that occurred. One CANNOT
willingly drink poison any more than the Word of God
would allow you to throw yourself down from a tall
building and expect to live.
Why do people look over their shoulder for the catcher,
just before they are slain in the Spirit?
Good question. Why do they? I'd like some of the
churches to answer that one. I DO NOT allow ANY
"catchers" at Apostolic Temple...period. Why? Because I
want you to understand, if GOD moves upon you to the point
that you are "slain" in the Spirit, it had better be
real. If you come in HERE and expect someone to "catch"
you as you're falling backward, the you Sir or Ma'am are a
lying deceiver. You only want people to THINK you are
somehow more "spiritual" than someone else.
sure how I could have answered that question by the Word
of God, but there is MY answer.
If tongues are so centrally important, why is the gift of
tongues not again mentioned after Acts 19:6 and the book
of first Corinthians?
I believe that MOST Charismatic and Pentecostal churches
today put WAY too much emphasis on the "speaking of
tongues". I have heard many proclaim at a good old
fashioned prayer meeting that someone "Must seek to speak
in tongues". Friend, you may hate me, but THAT is an
outright lie. You BETTER NOT seek just to "speak in
tongues". If that is all you are seeking, then YOU are
NOT seeking the true Spirit of God. You are seeking an
emotional, charismatic experience that will most likely
bring you a "tongue" but it won't be of God. What you
BETTER do is to seek JESUS. Period.
(see how you get me started?) I could ask you the same
question about Baptism. There are nearly as many
scriptures on speaking in tongues as there are about
baptism but once you get into the "meaty" portion of
scripture, you don't read about it. Now, in all fairness,
there are other doctrines that aren't really covered
either BUT they are necessary to understand in order to
lay a rock solid foundation of belief and doctrine. Have
you read Hebrews 6:1-2?
"Hebrews 6:1-2 Therefore leaving the principles of the
doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not
laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works,
and of faith toward God, Of the doctrine of baptisms, and
of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead,
and of eternal judgment."
do we see the doctrine of "Laying on of Hands" being
taught? How about the plural of "baptismS"?
believe your answer is found somewhat in the Book of
Jude. Look at verse 3. Jude says (my paraphrase) I WAS
going to write to you of the COMMON SALVATION, but it was
needful for me to write to tell you that you need to
contend for the faith! Apparently, there was a common
salvation that was accepted and understood to be such.
What could that possibly have been (How about THE plan of
Salvation that was first preached as Jesus proclaimed it
Why are Pentecostal healing revivals FULL of genuinely and
undisputedly crippled wheelchair-ridden people who NEVER
I have the same question. My belief concerning revival,
though is "RE-VIVAL". It is for the Saints to become
"re-energized" or "revived" in their spirit. We all had a
zeal and a first love when we initially repented and came
to God. Over the years MANY grow somewhat stagnant. I
believe a REVIVAL is what is needed to Stir Up the Saints
again and to encourage them to FIGHT the good Fight.
healings occur, so be it...if they don't ...so be it. Too
many today are chasing after signs and wonders and this,
my friend, is wrong. Pure wrong.
that you are referring to these so called "miracle
crusades" and "healing crusades" My question is exactly
the same in such cases. They always have someone healed
who has an "unseen" problem. I can't see a headache or an
earache or some rare disease. Many times these healers
will proclaim that someone is healed of cancer (yet that
poor soul has to wait to get back to a doctor only to find
that the cancer is still there). There are just as many
more, as you stated, that are in wheelchairs that NEVER
get healed. My question to these "Faith-Miracle Crusaders
is the same" How do you explain that?
believe in healings and miracles? Absolutely. I've
experienced the genuine. Do I believe they happen over
and over and over again 1000 times a day? Not hardly.
believe this pretty much sums up all your questions. Feel
free to send more at any time.
interesting thing: I never received any further
correspondence from this particular gentleman.