I'm not sure what you mean by "fit within the boundaries of His science and physics." The parting of the Red Sea did, and the collapse of the wall of Jericho did, but how does the floating axehead or the walking on the water fit into what you're thinking?

And, of course, I perceive theophanies like Exodus 3 (burning bush) and Acts 2 (fire above their heads), as divine phenomena, not science and physics. The dispersing of languages in Genesis 11 could easily have been a natural occurrence, and even though the languages of Acts 2 are deliberately associated with Genesis 11, there is obviously something miraculous going on.

> it is not in His personality to perform "snap of the fingers" miracles.

The nature of this miracle is in the miracle of speech, which seems to occupy a unique category in the Bible. The easiest referents are Gen. 1 where God created by the force of His spoken word, and John 1, where Jesus is identified as the Word. We also know that things like the prophetic word and the proclaimed word are important in revelation. That the arrival of the Holy Spirit is manifested by a miracle of the spoken word and of the heard word doesn't strike me as out of character.

From my research, I feel like God's miracles typically fit within the boundaries of His science and physics of this Earth. Furthermore, it is not in His personality to perform "snap of the fingers" miracles. This is why this particular miracle always is of great interest to me.

The terms Luke uses are all the common words for regular speech. Not only is there no indication in the text that the communication was non-verbal and non-audible, but Luke uses 3 terms from the Septuagint of Genesis 11, seeming to be making an intentional connection.

It seems that the people heard an audible sound (Acts 2.6) of the arrival of the Spirit. It seems they each heard a message in their own language (2.6, διαλέκτῳ, their own dialect), and the excitement was so palpable a crowd gathered around them to see what was happening (2.6).

Ben Witherington writes, "The phrase 'in his own language' modifies the verb 'speaking' in v. 6, not the verb 'hearing.' So there is exactly one miracle of speech at Pentecost: the ability to suddenly speak a foreign language without having learned it."

Again, Witherington: "The larger context of the story that Luke is presenting also supports this interpretation of the text. In Genesis 11 God confused the languages of humankind so they could not multiply sin. At Pentecost the multiple languages problem and language barrier is not resolved, but the Good News overcomes the problem by being shared in all the various languages of the persons present there. While Pentecost doesn’t reverse the effect of God’s confusing the languages at Babel (since the multiplication of sin is still a possibility), it overcomes the problem for the sake of the salvation of the nations.

"There may be one other echo that the Pentecost story has. There was an early Jewish tradition that the revelation of the Ten Commandments to Moses on Sinai came in all the languages of the world, since it was God’s Word not just for Hebrew-speaking Jews. Here is a closer parallel to the Pentecost story, and it may be that Luke in Acts was suggesting that God had indeed done at Pentecost what the rabbis had suggested once happened at Sinai, namely, sharing his saving Word in all human languages. The proof we are on the right track is that the one-day festival of Pentecost had come to be the day when Jews celebrated the giving of the Law at Sinai. Luke’s presentation of what actually happened at Pentecost reflects and echoes these earlier traditions."

In 2.7 & 11, even the passers-by acknowledged hearing actual speaking. There is no hint that only the 120 disciples, or even just the believers could hear what was being said. The hubbub drew a crowd of even scoffers (2.13). I just don't see how what Luke is talking about could be interpreted as non-verbal and non-audible. While, as you say, the Spirit [i]could[/i] do such a thing, that's not what the text seems to be indicating.

> it doesn't seem to fit the personality of His miracles.

I'll agree that we don't see a miracle like this any other time, but that doesn't mean much. There was only 1 burning bush, 1 axehead floating, 1 donkey talking, 1 water to wine, etc.

God's miracles are often singular in their focus (one of the reasons I have problems with claiming a global flood, which would require about 50 miracles in coordination and sequence, at least): the waters part, the bread is multiplied, the water becomes wine, Jesus walks on water, etc. In that sense I see this as similar: people hear their own languages.

Second, the miracles of God are rarely stand-alone miracles, but they are meant as signs of God's revelation that are in tandem with something else (a prophetic word) to explain them. That's what we see hear, since the fire is followed by a sermon through which God works mightily. So in that sense I see this as similar.

Third, almost all of God's miracles are to lead people to belief and to a relationship with him. Again, that's what I see here.

So we'd have to talk about why you think this doesn't fit the personality of God's style.

Thanks for the awesome reply!!!

To clarify my thoughts, is it possible that this communication was non-verbal and non-audible? Perhaps, through the Holy Spirit's omniscience, the words were understood without being spoken?

The idea that words were spoken out loud and translated mid-air to everyone's ears seems almost too easy. Not saying God isn't capable obviously, but it doesn't seem to fit the personality of His miracles.

Thanks!

I'm curious by your use of the term "telepathy," and I don't know what you mean by it. You'll have to explain. Do you think the HS enabled the apostles to move fire to their heads and to bring the rush of wind?

Let's look at Acts 2.1-4.

Pentecost. The festival had several associations in ancient Israel. It is perhaps the anniversary of the giving of the law (Ex. 19.1), the pinnacle of the Feast of Weeks Weeks (Ex. 34.22; Dt. 16.10); Day of First Fruits (Num. 28.26; Ex. 23.16), and a celebration of the spring harvest. It also followed the Day of Atonement in the Israelite calendar. I think what's important for Acts 2 is that it was associated with the renewal of the covenant made with Noah (the great act of judgment and salvation) and also with Moses (the great act of salvation and deliverance). Because of its association with the giving of the Sinaitic law, it was considered the birthday of Judaism. We can see why God picked this day to send His Spirit.

The text doesn't specify where they were, but perhaps at the Temple (Acts 1.4 & 14). This would make sense. According to Lk. 24.53, they were often there. There they would have an excellent opportunity of addressing a large audience (Acts 2.14).

The wind. Notice it was [i]not[/i] wind. There was no wind. It was a [i]sound[/i]. It seems to have been the audible, moving manifestation of God's presence with them. Maybe it was something like Elijah heard on Mt. Horeb (1 Ki. 19.11). It "filled the whole house," which, if this were the Temple, would also be appropriate. Suddenly, as Malachi 3.1 mentions in a different context, the Lord has come. Boom. Drop mike.

Tongues of fire. What this was is tough to nail down. It says they saw "what seemed to be" tongues of fire, meaning that they weren't sure; that's what it looked like and seemed like, but it was somehow different. Our minds go instantly to Exodus 3.2 and the burning bush. It wasn't literal fire, but it looked like it, sort of. It was God's presence. It seems to have been a moving flame, as we'd see flickering on top of a torch.

But then we find out that this "fire" seemed to have entered the room as a singularity, after which it divided and came to rest on each one. God both single and plural; God is a unified essence but also able to be with each individual separately. It's a spectacular, jaw-dropping scene.

And then the 12 disciples start speaking in their own language, probably Aramaic, but each person there hears them in their own language (2.6). It's a a reversal of the Tower of Babel (Gn. 11.7-9). (There are at least a dozen connections between Acts 2.1-4 and Gen. 11.1-9.) It's an immediate fulfillment of Jesus's commission to take the message to the whole world (Mt. 28.19; Acts 2.5).

Well, there's a quickie overview. Let me know what else you want to talk about this section, and what you meant by your "telepathy" suspicion.

Jim,

I have often wondered about Acts chapter 2 and the Holy Spirit at Pentecost. Phrases such as "Suddenly a sound like a mighty wind came from heaven" and "They saw tongues like flames of a fire that separated and came to rest on each of them." Could this possibly be telepathy that the Holy Spirit briefly unlocked?

I would love to hear all your thoughts pertaining to this occasion. Thanks!